Home schooling in CA

[BarTopDancer]

The choice to homeschool should be there. I think the way that MW had to go about doing it (meeting with teachers, ensuring that her children were learning and where they should be) is the way to go.

It concerns me that nearly anyone who wants to homeschool, can. There is nothing stopping someone who is illiterate or has no concept of basic skills from teaching their kids (and passing on the lack-of-knowledge).

There is also nothing mandating socialization. Yes, there are a lot of options available, but nothing that requires kids to be around other kids. How are they going to learn basic skills like playing with others, problem solving with their peers, sharing, stuff like that. How are these kids going to function in the real world?

[katiesue]

For some kids homeschooling is the best option. But I think taking your kid out of a public school just because you think the quialty is low doesn't help. What if you instead helped out at the school? Your impact would be greater. Or lobbied to help fix the programs that are broken. Maddy's elementry school had an art teacher. Her salary was paid for by the PTA. The parents wanted art so they made it happen.

Someone who is orgainzed and motivated enough to homeschool their child would probably be a great help in the classroom or with the PTA. In my experience the schools are only as good as the parents who help keep them going. And motivated parents also work with their kids at home as well to follow up on things learned in school.

[tracilicious]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

But the reality was that I spent 13 years (including kindergarten) in the LAUSD and got an excellent education. For 7 of those years I was with largely the same set of students. Most did well. A lot did not. Of those that did not, my observation was that most of the reason was that education was simply not a priority in their home. There were certainly a few for whom the public system simply did not have the capacity to help. But, to my eye, they were the exception. The majority of those that were struggling would have been perfectly capable of learning and achieving within the system if they actually tried.

If a lot did not do well, then by your own standards earlier in the thread, something should be done to change that. Also, if, according to your theory, the same kids that do poorly in public schools will do poorly homeschooled, then why object to homeschooling them?

What if the students that didn't really try just weren't interested in what was being taught, or the way it was presented? I didn't try at all and still got good grades and a full scholarship all while deliberately learning as little as possible. That's a flawed system, IMO.

I can see Indi being one of those kids that just wouldn't try. He would do horribly sitting all day in a classroom staring at some grown up chattering away about things that bored him. Similarly, he would do horribly if I made him sit down and learn a "lesson." So we do a totally different type of homeschooling which works with the way he learns. He loves to have his hands on things...building, drawing, cooking...we explore in a very physical way while talking about what we are doing. There's a lot of learning involved, but nothing formal. He couldn't get that in school. At best, his drive to learn would be squelched. At worst, he'd be labeled ADD or something similar.

He just turned five a few weeks ago and has become interested in learning to write. The way he likes to do this is by having me write a word on his paper and he copies it. For one thing, I was amazed at how accurate his printing was, having had no experience with it. When your brain is ready for something, you do it easily. But what struck me most was how he would experiment with it. He would put words together and add extra letters to the end and then ask, "What does this say?" It was such a fantastic way to learn. He would never have been allowed to do that in school. I can totally see him in kindergarten or first grade with his little lined paper being told to write the same letter twenty times or whatever they do and either refusing or getting more and more bored with every passing minute. Then eventually he'd be labeled as one of those kids that just doesn't try. But why try for something that feels so crappy?

[Morrigoon]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Same boat here.

I'll admit that I had the slight advantage that my parents were part of said system. However, they NEVER went behind the scenes to pull strings. Everything they did and had access to were things that any parent could do and had access to. They were just more familiar with what those things were.

But the reality was that I spent 13 years (including kindergarten) in the LAUSD and got an excellent education. For 7 of those years I was with largely the same set of students. Most did well. A lot did not. Of those that did not, my observation was that most of the reason was that education was simply not a priority in their home. There were certainly a few for whom the public system simply did not have the capacity to help. But, to my eye, they were the exception. The majority of those that were struggling would have been perfectly capable of learning and achieving within the system if they actually tried.

I am also a victim product of the LAUSD, but I credit that system with nothing. This is the system who, after a great deal of effort to meet with my counselor, get pre-approval on coursework I'd be taking on foreign exchange, etc., called my parents in October of that semester to ask why I wasn't in school. Good job guys. And mind you, it's not like the system provided me with any info about foreign exchange either. Anything outside of the box or dare I say it, enriching, like that was completely beyond their ability to comprehend. That's just one example, but I found it to be the case across the board. Anything over and above the lowest common denominator was beyond the system's abilities to deal with. LAUSD bites.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by tracilicious

If a lot did not do well, then by your own standards earlier in the thread, something should be done to change that. Also, if, according to your theory, the same kids that do poorly in public schools will do poorly homeschooled, then why object to homeschooling them?

Aaaaargh!

[tracilicious]

Originally Posted by LSPoorEeyorick

I know that the public system is simply not right for every child, so I have no problems with people taking matters into their own hands. At the same time, I do think that the well-roundedness is very important - as is learning to cooperate with children other than your relatives, and learning to work with adults other than your parents. If I were to put my children into home-schooling, I imagine I'd want to use a co-op with many other children taught by many other parents, and I suspect I'd want them to learn all of the standard subjects taught in school, as well as the creative ones that have been all but eliminated.

I would go a bit farther and say that while most kids survive the public school system, less than half truly thrive under it. Don't get me wrong, I certainly want my kids to have a well rounded education. My statement earlier was that as far as the state is concerned, the only purpose of education, public or otherwise, is to ensure productive citizens.

My experience with homeschool and socialization is that it's much easier to provide a homeschooled kid with a well rounded social life. There are so many groups that do fun things and the kids have friends of all ages. The older teach the younger social skills much more quickly than one would learn when segregated by age.

As far as learning all the standard subjects taught in schools...I want this to a point. I think there is something to be said for knowing what everybody else knows. But there is so much knowledge in the world that you can't be well rounded in every subject known to man. I'm totally ok if my kid is four years ahead in biology and two years behind in math. At some point extra focus on math might be needed to get into college in this hypothetical example, but my point is that as long as my kids have a diverse educational offering and an eagerness to learn then I'm pretty happy. I think that we sacrifice something in order to churn out people that know exactly the same stuff. There is something to be said for really digging into something you are interested in. Yes, you want to cover the basics of other stuff as well, but not to the exclusiong of speciality.

[BarTopDancer]

Some children will grow up to be artists. What happens to all the children who were unschooled or homeschooled with a focus on art when they can't make a living that way? And they can't get into college because they don't have the knowledge or skills to pass the tests to get in? And they can't get a job that pays a living wage because they don't have a degree.

[tracilicious]

Sorry, GD, after I posted that I read your comment about not objecting to homeschooling kids (see where my "critical thinking skills" got me?! lol). Though it does sound like you are pro-public schools from the rest of your posts.

[tracilicious]

Originally Posted by BarTopDancer

Some children will grow up to be artists. What happens to all the children who were unschooled with a focus on art when they can't make a living that way? And they can't get into college because they don't have the knowledge or skills to pass the tests to get in? And they can't get a job that pays a living wage because they don't have a degree.

This is just such an absurd hypothetical that I can't even properly respond. Of the unschooled adults I know, one is a writer, one is a biologist, and one is a computer programmer. I don't even think you can unschool with a focus on art. You unschool with a focus on life. Here in AZ it's pretty impossible not to get into college. Homeschoolers can start at 14 and they teach very basic classes for people that don't score well. I don't know anyone that couldn't get into college as a result of homeschooling (or unschooling).

Unschooling is not about deliberately not learning. It's about finding opportunities to incorporate learning into everyday life. Most of the unschoolers I know seem to be advanced in at least one subject. I say seem to be because it's not like we're measuring our kids all the time. The most important thing is that they are learning to use their brain very effectively, or rather not being taught to shut if down and swallow whatever learning pill a school wants them to, making your scenario above highly unlikely.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by tracilicious

Sorry, GD, after I posted that I read your comment about not objecting to homeschooling kids (see where my "critical thinking skills" got me?! lol). Though it does sound like you are pro-public schools from the rest of your posts.

Yes, I am pro public schools. That doesn't mean I want kids who will benefit more from homeschool than public school to be forced in to public school. I just think that public schools and public school teachers take a lot of sh*t for things that aren't (and shouldn't be) within their control, nor do I think that the issues that most kids have in public school can be solved by homeschooling.

I would never argue that the public school system is not flawed. It is. But there's a massive disconnect between what the public thinks is flawed vs. what is actually flawed. So when I see people bad mouthing the system for things it was never designed to do, yes I get defensive.