Homeschooling again

That is what had me a bit thrown off. How is DL different from home schooling?

I know that there are some differences, yet there are plenty of similarities that I thought would be appreciated by DL advocates.

 

>>

As a a homeschool parent and a distance learning student, I find them quite similar. Of course, I have less school work than my children

 

DL = good

HS = failure

~shrugs~

 

Is it really a question?

Not sure how you draw this conclusion.
DL programs -- the legitimate ones -- are regionally accredited and subject to various external oversights.

The spin from the pro-HS posts here has been "leave us alone," which seems to suggest a desire to be subjected to no oversight.

At their core, I guess one might draw a parallel regarding the "motivation" factor. Though, as the children are being schooled regardless of who stands in the front of the room, it motivation would seem to be on the part of the parent not the student.

Steve F. just because someone was the subject of an article posted on an advocacy group's website doesn't automatically grant legitimacy to their spin of the underlying event. Was it necessary to up the emotional ante with "social workers were pounding on the door"? In fact the article mentions social workers "visited." (Do we really need the added imagery they came in like a SWAT team?) Again, unless you are prepared to advocate for 100% removal of all oversight in all areas, it is rather disingenuous to condemn the very existence of oversight and its application in this situation. A concern was raised, and it was investigated. Apparently (the article isn't clear in anything other than its "see, we're being persecuted" tone), the suspicions were unfounded and investigation ended.

[And, by the way, I didn't mention the HSDLA article in my response. I was taking issue with the characterizations of the "5 things wrong with public school" and the study allegedly supporting homeschooling over public schooling.]

Haven't there been enough incidents where children were discovered after long-term neglect to inspire us to err on the side of caution? Again, public school students have several points of evaluation in their education where problems could be addressed. Are you really suggesting that a million plus American children not have any educational checkpoints for 12 years? "It takes a village ... " unless you're a homeschooler, then society is expected to just accept what its told by the parents?

And Shawn, please stop drinking the "tenure=evil" Kool-Aid. The reason for tenure exists is precisely the same argument you are forwarding about homeschooling -- so that teachers were not subject to the political whims of changing administrations. Homeschoolers want the freedom to not teach their children the "approved" curriculum? Well public school teachers would like to know they can keep their jobs when the political power shifts. And, yes, tenure does -- :gasp: -- provide job protection so that a teacher can only be fired for cause. Note that does not -- as most anti-tenure critics assert -- mean a "job for life." It simply means the tenured teacher must be granted due process before termination.

Steve

 

Welcome to the slippery slope

Shawn,

Please, enough with the hyperbole.

The fact that there IS a public system of education is a testament to the value we placed on our children. Society deemed securing an education for children to be an issue of public importance.

You choose to not participate in that public-sponsored service, and that is fine, your choice.

But please do not cloak yourself in the 4th Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures when you engage in a societal activity like education. Just because you've chosen to educate your children at home doesn't eliminate society's obligation to them.

And what kind of circular argument is: "increasing oversight of homeschoolers resources are being squandered that could be used to improve the public schools"? You do not have faith in public education, but you advocate giving homeschooling a free pass so that more money can be put in to public education. Another back door attempt at "leave us alone to do whatever we want to"?

Finally, just what is "legitimate reform?" You seem to want homeschoolers to be credited with the nobility of their convictions, but professional educators -- who spend years learning their trade and actually serve other people's children, not their own -- are subject to ridicule and derision? Just because the NEA/AFT do not jump on the latest edu-fad they are standing in the way?

Please, stop the hyperbole.

 

The problem is that homeschooling seems to have a relationship to conventional K-12 education that's uncomfortably close to the relationship between degree-mills and universities.

Both consist of individuals setting up their own little personal schools where they can do pretty much as they please, outside the accreditation/quality-assurance frameworks. Both dismiss the need for institutional resources and educational qualifications. Both argue that 'It works for us, so it shouldn't be any concern of yours'.

I'm not totally opposed to homeschooling by any means. It's a wonderful opportunity in many cases I'm sure, just as it can no doubt be very harmful in other circumstances. What society needs is some means of maximizing the positive results while heading off the harm. (Getting homeschool advocates to even admit that there are dangers is like pulling teeth.)

I'd like to see California (where this stuff is suddenly front and center) pass legislation making responsible homeschooling possible while ensuring that there's an effective and inobtrusive oversight system. There has to be some means of verifying that kids really are learning, and some means of intervening when they aren't.

I expect that the homeschoolers in turn are going to worry about the words 'legislation', 'responsible', 'oversight' and 'intervene'. (Not unlike how many do-it-yourself university owners react to the idea of accreditation, I'd guess.)

 

I certainly do understand the concerns. There is failure within the home schooling movement. I have admitted that within the the two threads here and I think others have as well. That is hardly like pulling teeth. It seems fairly easy to have open discussion with home schoolers since it has already happened with ease here.

There is a big difference with mills is that mills operate to scam people out of money and to deceive people. That is the primary reason for these things to exist. With home schoolers I think that the reasons are quite a bit different.

Parents generally want to give their children the best opportunity in life to succeed. The motivation is very different between the two.

Hopefully you don't think that the reason that people want to practice freedom always have some evil reason for doing this. Much good comes from giving people their own choice in life to better their situation.

 

Devil's in the details

I wanted to congratulate Bill on his well articulated response. I share his view that the concern is not homeschooling, per se, but the responsible application of this educational venture.

But . . .

. . . sometimes the motivation is immaterial. There are plenty of well-intentioned by woefully un/under-prepared people engaged in activities they would be well-advised to avoid. I think we can agree that if it is an adult and the activity hurts no one else, then it's nobody's business.

However, choosing how your child will be educated has far-reaching ramifications, literally impacting the entire life of the child.

In my view, that is far too important a decision to be presented as parents simply having "freedom" to make a "choice". I, and people close to me, have worked in social service fields where the "choices" of caregivers played out in truly negative and harmful ways.

I think everyone has a responsibility to keep such events to an absolute minimum.

Steve

 

Yikes, you ask for empirical data at the start of your post and then turn around and make your statement #2:You've suddenly equated "being left alone" with feeding inappropriate theories and philosophies to children. Perhaps you should search out some of that empirical data you put a premium on?

For those who are worried about home schooling being akin to diploma mills, let's not forget that homeschoolers have to undergo the same requirements and admissions test to gain entry to colleges and universitites as everyone else. There are no homeschooled colleges. If Stanford, UC Riverside and others are starting to pay attention to homeschoolers, then you might want to consider that there is some value to those schools for recruiting homeschoolers. This might be evidence that it is working in many cases.

Are there instances of inappropriate education and lax standards and dangerously uneducated students coming out of homeschools? I have no doubt that there are. Certainly the same can be said of many students coming from public schools. You can't condemn homeschooling without a de facto condemnation of traditional schools. Both have their successes and both have their failures. If putting homeschools through rigorous tests of standards, curriculum content, and teacher competency were the answer, then why hasn't that worked in the public schools?

That said, the government is welcome to show up on our door. They will find one homeschooled student and one student about to enter the best Catholic high school in the area. They will find dedicated, degreed (advanced degreed), and in my case credentialed, parents teaching the homeschooler. Before teaching, I was a working mathematician in industry. I can teach my kid algebra and calculus. Lots of homeschooling families are like ours. They're not, by any means, a bunch of lunatic, religious fanatics living on a commune, as seems to be the stereotype. Do those exist? I'm sure they do. If it makes you feel better to classify homeschooling as that, then go ahead.

 

In my view, that is far too important a decision to be presented as parents simply having "freedom" to make a "choice". I, and people close to me, have worked in social service fields where the "choices" of caregivers played out in truly negative and harmful ways.
>>


Hummm....well, not being a caregiver- I'm a parent- I do actually have the choice to decide where my child receives his compulsory education. I also have the choice to give him peas or big macs....red shirts or blue. Let's not get carried away.

 

Paging the straw man, your red herring is ready

You know as well as I that this is not nature of my point. Likewise, I am confident you understand there will be no empirical data about the prevalence of inappropriate homeschooled environments. No one is going to fund a study about people doing such a poor job as to be deemed a failure at homeschooling. The evidence will be, necessarily, anecdotal.

But that's not the point ... the oversight is there to make sure everyone maintains minimum standards which -- obviously -- is not going to be a problem for those who are conscientious and sincere in their efforts.

(This, however, does totally ignore those who provide a solid basic -- reading, writing, 'rithmetic -- education, integrated with a fundamentalist doctrinaire. But that is a whole different conversation!)

And here now, your red herring.

The need for oversight is not to badger the successes, but to hopefully mitigate the failures. These people are not the ones who will have children competing for college openings. These are the ones whose children won't be able to read or write.

Please, apples in one bin, oranges in the other.

Steve

 

Well ...

You mean with overly simplistic characterizations?

Big Macs vs. peas, red vs. blue shirts are nowhere near the same league of decisions as homeschool or public school.

And yes, you may choose to send your child to the public, private, or parochial school of your choice ... all of which must meet certain minimum accreditation standards.

But add homeschoolers to the mix and then suddenly asking for some form of minimum professional and/or educational qualification becomes a 4th Amendment violation.

Steve

 

>>

The frustration for me answering this question is that you don't actually know about state schooling laws....your making things up.....but I can't let this go.... in many states (mine included) homeschools ARE private schools (and so are parochial schools). There are no accreditation standards for my homeschool- or the $450 per month "prep school" - or the Catholic school in my neighborhood. Each is technically Unaccredited. You might be surprised to know that private schools don't have to have licensed teachers- I'm sure Matt can chime in on how unqualified they all are. You should know that homeschools are legal in all 50 states (even California) but the requirements vary.... the entire 4th amendment issue is how one family approaches a specific requirement of that state. While it impacts homeschoolers, the truth is that it really doesn't. I would bet it impacts more Hollywood child stars than homeschoolers.

 

Actually the frustration is ...

... you don't know what I know. (And, no I am not "making things up.")

Actually, I am aware of these inconsistencies -- welcome to a federal republic. However, pointing out the shameless lack of uniformity in educational oversight would seem to undermine the advocacy for homeschooling. If 50 states (and all of their municipalities) cannot agree on what the standards for a professionally run school should be, we should "fix" that problem by permitting "amateur" schools to flourish?

Sadly, yes, many states do not have accreditation standards for private/parochial schools but the free-market system does enforce its own checks and balances. If such schools had truly unimpressive success rates, how long would they exist? But the home school of 1 (maybe 5), can exist regardless of quality for as long as the parent has the inclination to continue?

This is your argument?

Again, I know they are legal, but pointing out that the requirements vary weakens, not strengthens, the case for homeschooling.

Huh? I'm not sure what this is even supposed to mean.

=====

I'd also like to point out that -- way back when -- my original response asked to dial down the hyperbolic rhetoric, that there can be both good homeschools and good public schools. But, since then, it has just been a litany of "hey leave us homeschoolers alone, we know better than all of you."
That's nice for inspiring a bunker mentality. Not so great for crafting a persuasive argument supporting the cause.

 

Yes, it is true that private schools do not require teachers to have licenses. In fact private school teachers (at least in Virginia) do not even have to have a degree in their subject area. Actually, they don't even need a degree at all. However, this does not mean that ALL private school teachers are unqualified. As for their requiring licenses, states give out the licenses, but states do not control private schools. So why would a school not affiliated with the state require a license issued by the state? While it is not a requirement, that does not mean that private schools do not want their teachers to be licensed or degreed. This requirement varies from private school to private school. My public school does not require me to have an advanced degree, but I chose to get one to improve my teaching ability. While the private schools, in general, may not have requirements, this does not mean that no one is actually qualified. In that regard, private school teachers are really not so different than homeschool parents. They may, or may not, have the qualifications.

Private schools are usually accredited by someone, however, such as the National Association of Independant Schools. I really can't say anything about their accreditation standards because I don't deal with private schools at the present time. Just like homeschools, just like public schools, private schools have their pros and cons. I'll give you some examples.

When I finished my BA, I was not yet a fully licensed teacher. I decided to apply to a few private schools to try to get some experience. Most of the private schools around the area are religiously affiliated. It was amazing to see the differences in their application process. I specifically recall one Christian school asking tremendous amounts about my faith, and ZERO questions about my education or skills. That was a huge turn off to me. Yet, the Catholic school in the area was more focused on what my skills were. The only thing they asked about my faith was whether I was Catholic or not, noting that preference would be given to practicing Catholics, which I was not. Clearly it showed me what these schools found important. The one school could hire a total dud, but as long as he or she was a Bible toting, psalm reading, devil hating, holy roller the school considered the individual acceptable. I find that ridiculous, but given the nature of the school, it's their priority to do their own hiring. However, I would never send me child there knowing what I know about their hiring process.

My wife went to private school her whole life. She grew up in Delaware and claimed that at the time she was growing up, the Delaware public schools were really bad, so "everyone" (the parents) put their kids in private school because they wouldn't dare put them in public school when they could afford private school instead. I found that rather elitist, but it's not like it was her choice. She went to a huge Catholic high school, which actually is quite impressive. They definitely offer a great deal more in terms of courses than the public schools do, so I can't fault them for that. That's the beauty of private schools, and yes, I suppose homeschooling as well. Because they are not held by state standards, they can offer whatever courses they choose. However, private schools, unlike homeschools, are usually being watched by their accreditor. (I love World History, but oh how I would love to be able to teach a course on Greek and Roman mythology! Were I to teach at a private school, I could do that.)

I'm currently applying to a private Episcopal school. Despite the fact that my county is the 3rd richest in the state, the county supervisors are cutting our funding because they are very much anti-school. We only have 3 schools, and a total enrollment of less than 1200. With billions of dollars in the county, why can't the rich snots fork over an extra million or so? My wife's job is in jeopardy, so we are looking for other options. This private school is accredited, and it has excellent reviews. I've also looked up several of the teachers there on Virginia's educator query, and many of them are licensed teachers with advanced degrees. So this school clearly takes care to obtain quality teachers who are indeed qualified.

Based on the original statement above, I wouldn't go as far to say that every private school teacher is unqualified. That's a bit of a stretch. However, I'm sure there are quite a few who are not qualified. Fortunately, however, there is an accreditor keeping watch, and standards are being met. Otherwise those private schools who choose to seek accreditation would not obtain it.

 

Substandard unaccredited universities exist for all kinds of reasons. They aren't all knowing and intentional scams.

Owners might believe that they have a mission to teach. (Many religious-exempt "seminaries" operate very sincerely out of church basements.) Students are often convinced that they're already great authorities. Their life-experience doctorates are only overdue certifications of what they know they truly deserve.

I don't think that homeschooling rhetoric is all that dissimilar. Children always seem to be superior. Parents are always convinced that they can teach better than the trained professionals, regardless of their real qualifications and commitment.

The ancient Greeks called it hubris.

 

Just as is the case with universities, on the K-12 level there's a distinction between accreditation and the requirements of the state education code.

Here in California, WASC can and does accredit countless private K-12 schools. Many of them are explicitly religious. Here's a rather exotic local example of an RA private K-12 religious school.

The occasion for these homeschooling threads was the California Court of Appeals ruling that homeschooling is technically private schooling just as you said, so that homeschoolers are bound by existing state law requiring private schools to employ credentialed teachers. That's what got all of this going and threw the state's homeschoolers into a spin.

 

Here in the Bay Area, more and more private schools are requiring credentials. This is especially true, since many of them are applying for, and getting, NCLB funds. The following is a generalization and personal opinion, but I believe it would hold up well if an actual study was made: here in the Bay Area, the best private schools tend to have more teachers with advanced degrees in their subject areas. At the school where I teach, the majority of teachers have advanced degrees, and we have a number of PhD's as well. You don't see many PhD's in the public schools. Generally those teachers are looking for a more serious student body, something that's very hard to find at inner city public schools.

In private schools you also tend to see teachers with degrees from the best schools. Parents want teachers who have graduated from the same schools they want their children to attend. Consequently, private school administrations snatch these teachers up and strive to keep them happy.

 

Ah yes, the critical thinking course required of PhD students. I'm not sure there was a straw man or a red herring, though. You made a grievous generalization that homeschoolers who want to be left alone are often disseminating some kind of dangerous information to their children. You made this generalization without any supporting evidence, which you correctly note will be hard to find. I offered an alternative explanation. Your evidence was entirely anecdotal; mine was based on real experience, and real changes in the college marketplace. Yes I understand that our circles don't intersect. You are talking about the failures. I am talking about the successes. I trust you are equally concerned about the failures in public schools. Would you advocate more oversight there?

I understand your point about oversight being needed for the cases where a poor job is being done. How, exactly, will this work? It doesn't exactly work in the public schools, where no amount of oversight prevents scores of students graduating (or not) without basic skills in reading, writing, and math. Homeschoolers in CA are advised to keep records of attendance, curriculum, and performance assessment, just as in public schools.

Perhaps now you can explain how this oversight would work to rule out all these dangerous home schools that you are so worried about. However, first, you might provide the solution to public school underachievement, which affect far greater numbers of students.

And then finally you hint at some sort of a problem (??) with good home schools that provide a “fundamentalist doctrinaire”. Our home school has no religious component, but I have no idea what you are suggesting here. The danger that requires a “different conversation” is --- what? Again you are troubled by your feelings on the matter – without any empirical evidence??? If that’s the case, you should qualify it as such, instead of hinting that perhaps local government needs to start probing this too??? You’re making it downright hard to erect straw men, because it’s hard to understand what, exactly, your argument is in the first place.

 

Tom,
Excellent comments. I am wondering how we define the "failure group" of homeschoolers, and as you pointed out- how many children can this group include? Seems like those concerned about the state of education at large would have their hands full with all of the schools who are not passing the "No child left behind" requirements. That certainly represents a much larger group.