Home Schooling

[Wacky]

This is a "spin off" from the discussion of the FLDS.

Is home schooling "in the best interest" of the nation and the children?

Presumedly, we would all agree that an "educated populace" is in the interest of the nation. That is the rational behind educational requirements and the taxes that support public education.

However, by allowing "home schooling", are we depriving society, or its members, with an assurance that a reasonable effort is being made to have "effective" education? I have no doubt that there are many parents who feel that they are more capable than the "public" alternative, in educating their offspring. Many of them subscribe to educational organizations that assist in assuring that the curriculum is appropriate and provide impartial monitoring of the student's progress.

There are also efforts made to provide "social interaction" with both other "home schooled" and other populations.

I am not concerned about these students. What concerns me is the effect on society of having children "educated" under a set of standards that receive no outside review and where the children have been isolated from ALL of the realities of the "outside world".

IMHO, this can only lead to the creation of individuals who have no capacity to exist outside their own closed community. They lack the skills to accomplish ANYTHING that is of value to the rest of their nation.

On that basis, why should we allow them to utilize ANY of the resources of the Nation, including protection from "invasion" by an outside group?

Note: This diatribe is INTENDED to provoke discussion. It does not necessarily reflect my personal opinion.

[Wacky]

WESTON, Wisconsin (AP) -- A couple who prayed as their 11-year-old daughter died of untreated diabetes will be charged with second-degree reckless homicide.
Madeline Neumann, daughter of Dale and Leilani Neumann, died March 23 at the family's rural Weston home. An autopsy determined she died from undiagnosed diabetic ketoacidosis, an ailment that left her with too little insulin in her body.

Leilani Neumann, 40, previously said she never expected her daughter to die. The family believes in the Bible, which says healing comes from God, but they have nothing against doctors, she said.

Dale Neumann, a former police officer, has said he has friends who are doctors and started CPR "as soon as the breath of life left" his daughter's body.

Madeline, who was being home-schooled, was in good health until she started getting tired about two weeks before she died, her mother has said. When the situation got worse over Easter weekend, "we stayed fast in prayer then," Leilani Neumann said. "We believed that she would recover."

[Mini-Geek]

Originally Posted by Wacky

WESTON, Wisconsin (AP) -- A couple who prayed as their 11-year-old daughter died of untreated diabetes will be charged with second-degree reckless homicide.
Madeline Neumann, daughter of Dale and Leilani Neumann, died March 23 at the family's rural Weston home. An autopsy determined she died from undiagnosed diabetic ketoacidosis, an ailment that left her with too little insulin in her body.

Leilani Neumann, 40, previously said she never expected her daughter to die. The family believes in the Bible, which says healing comes from God, but they have nothing against doctors, she said.

Dale Neumann, a former police officer, has said he has friends who are doctors and started CPR "as soon as the breath of life left" his daughter's body.

Madeline, who was being home-schooled, was in good health until she started getting tired about two weeks before she died, her mother has said. When the situation got worse over Easter weekend, "we stayed fast in prayer then," Leilani Neumann said. "We believed that she would recover."

This story has little, IMHO, to do with the topic at hand. I don't think that they should be charged with homicide, but definitely something. I believe that healing comes from God, but also that He doesn't always just work it as a miracle. Sometimes it comes from doctors.

It reminds me of a story that approximately goes:
A man was in a large flood. He believed that God would send someone to save him. He later got to his roof to prevent drowning. When someone came by on a boat and told him to get in, he turned them down saying that God would save him. The water continued to rise, and when a helicopter came and insisted he come, he turned them down again. (there were three things, but I don't remember the third) He drowned and died. When he got to heaven, he asked God why He didn't send an angel or something to save him. God replied that He did, three times.

Believe, pray, but go to a doctor also when you think there's something seriously wrong. She happened to be home-schooled. The only difference this makes is that perhaps she wouldn't have had to get permission to get off from school...and perhaps that a homeschooling family is more likely to be more religious and rely fully on prayer instead of a doctor, even in extreme cases.

[mdettweiler]

Originally Posted by Wacky

...
However, by allowing "home schooling", are we depriving society, or its members, with an assurance that a reasonable effort is being made to have "effective" education? I have no doubt that there are many parents who feel that they are more capable than the "public" alternative, in educating their offspring. Many of them subscribe to educational organizations that assist in assuring that the curriculum is appropriate and provide impartial monitoring of the student's progress.

There are also efforts made to provide "social interaction" with both other "home schooled" and other populations.

I am not concerned about these students. What concerns me is the effect on society of having children "educated" under a set of standards that receive no outside review and where the children have been isolated from ALL of the realities of the "outside world".

IMHO, this can only lead to the creation of individuals who have no capacity to exist outside their own closed community. They lack the skills to accomplish ANYTHING that is of value to the rest of their nation.
...

I beg to differ. Homeschooled children are not "isolated" from the world and its problems--they simply don't have to do their learning in an environment that inundates them with those problems all the time. Good homeschooling parents will keep their children informed about what's going on in the world, thus allowing them to learn about what you call the "realities of the outside world" and how to face them well.

As for social interaction, homeschoolers have just as much social interaction as publicly schooled children--the difference is that they interact with people of all ages, rather than just people in the same little pigeonhole of a grade. In fact, this is more indicative of the socialization they will be applying for all of thier adult life--how many adults out there socialize and work with mostly people of their exact same age (or at least very close to exactly the same age)? None, in fact!

So, thus, you could say that homeschooled children have better social and real-life training than students who go to a traditional school. They are not being isolated from the outside world--on the contrary, they are able to learn about the outside world in a more realistic manner.

Edit: Oh, one more thing: you mentioned about homeschooled students being "'educated' under a set of standard that have no outside review"--on the contrary, homeschooled students are required to take the same standardized tests as all other students, and they do extremely well on them.

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Ire realistic manner.

Edit: Oh, one more thing: you mentioned about homeschooled students being "'educated' under a set of standard that have no outside review"--on the contrary, homeschooled students are required to take the same standardized tests as all other students, and they do extremely well on them.

We've already been told (and given a URL that backs it up) that Texas
at least has no such requirements.

[mdettweiler]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

We've already been told (and given a URL that backs it up) that Texas
at least has no such requirements.

Okay, I must have missed that--well, at least in my state it's a requirement. But, a good homeschooling parent will want to get their child tested often anyway, both as proof that they're doing their job, and as a measurement of what areas they need to pay more attention to in their child's education.

[masser]

Originally Posted by Wacky

IMHO, this can only lead to the creation of individuals who have no capacity to exist outside their own closed community. They lack the skills to accomplish ANYTHING that is of value to the rest of their nation.

I don't believe the Amish home school, but the schools that Amish communities utilize fit the description you are giving above - no outside review of standards and a certain amount of isolation from the "outside world".

And yet, the skills of the Amish certainly benefit the rest of their nation. These benefits extend beyond the products and services they provide to their local regions. Their agrarian (and economically-realistic) lifestyles benefit the planet.

I think a similar argument could probably be made about the FLDS churches, but I am not sure. My point here is that the blanket statement that: "isolated children home-schooled without outside review of standards can not contribute to society" is false.

[Wacky]

Originally Posted by Wacky

I have no doubt that there are many parents who feel that they are more capable than the "public" alternative, in educating their offspring. Many of them subscribe to educational organizations that assist in assuring that the curriculum is appropriate and provide impartial monitoring of the student's progress.

There are also efforts made to provide "social interaction" with both other "home schooled" and other populations.

I am not concerned about these students.

Anonymous:
Please reconsider your comments in light of the portion of my posting herein re-quoted.

[mdettweiler]

Originally Posted by Wacky

Anonymous:
Please reconsider your comments in light of the portion of my posting herein re-quoted.

Sorry if they came across wrong--yes, I do understand that what you posted is not specifically your opinion but was intended to provoke discussion. However, it's a little hard to tell where the discussion-provoking part ends and your personal opinion begins--the "IMHO" later on in your post would seem to indicate a personal opinion. Can you please clarify as to what part of your original post was personal opinion, and what part was not?

[Xyzzy]

Our son attends a public school. We made this decision knowing that an education there is suboptimal.

There he can learn how the real world operates and he can hone his social skills with the people he will interact with someday. He has access to resources that we could never afford. He makes friends with a diverse group of people.

When he comes home, he attends school again, with us. We don't spend 8 hours studying mindless facts. We discuss things and solve problems. Our talks are unstructured and wander about.

Our son can read very well. He is 7 and he reads books that are appropriate for kids who are 12 or 13 years old. He reads (and understands) this well because he practices reading a lot.

If he asks us what a word means, we give him a dictionary. After he looks it up we talk about it.

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach him to fish and you feed him for life.

We were home schooled and it cost us dearly. We understand things have changed a lot in the last few years, but we still would never consider it as an option.

School is more than learning facts or passing an end of grade test.

[mdettweiler]

Originally Posted by Xyzzy

...

We were home schooled and it cost us dearly. We understand things have changed a lot in the last few years, but we still would never consider it as an option.
...

Care to elaborate on this? What exactly do you mean by "cost dearly"--you mean cost in the financial sense? Or in some other sense?