NYT,pg1: Taught at Home, but Seeking to Join Activities at Public Schools

[DeepModem Mom]

Taught at Home, but Seeking to Join Activities at Public Schools
By JAMES DAO
Published: June 22, 2005


STRASBURG, Pa., June 16 - Mary Mellinger began home-schooling her eldest sons, Andrew and Abram, on the family's 80-acre dairy farm five years ago, wanting them to spend more time with their father and receive an education infused with Christian principles. Home schooling could not, however, provide one thing the boys desperately wanted - athletic competition.

But the school district here, about 60 miles west of Philadelphia, does not allow home-schooled children to play on its teams. So Mrs. Mellinger reluctantly gave in and allowed the boys to enroll in public high school, where Andrew, 17, runs track and Abram, 15, plays football and both perform with the marching and concert bands.

"We grieved about losing the time we had with the boys," Mrs. Mellinger, 41, said outside the 150-year-old red brick house where Mellingers have lived for seven generations. "It seems so unfair. We're taxpayers, too."

Mrs. Mellinger's plaint has become the rallying cry for an increasing number of parents across the country who are pushing more public schools to open their sports teams, clubs, music groups and other extracurricular organizations to the nation's more than 1 million home-educated students.

This year, bills were introduced in at least 14 state legislatures, including Pennsylvania's, to require school districts to open extracurricular activities, and sometimes classes, to home-schooled children, say groups that track the issue. Fourteen states already require such access, while most others leave the decision to local school boards....


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/22/education/22home.html?

[iconoclastic cat]

1. What, so they can start proselytizing to the other kids?

[LynneSin]

6. If there are all these kids home schooled, let the start their own club

My opinion, not that it matters because I'm childless is this:

If I a homeschool kid wants to join in public school activies then that kid's family should pay for the insurance, equipment, uniform, books, travel or anything else that normally the public school would pay for.

But personally, if there are so many kids being homeschool like in Lancaster Co PA (was mentioned in the article) why aren't these homeschool families pooling their resources at starting their own afterschool activities.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

51. We have a nice one where I live...

There's an unspoken agreement amongst us to discuss neither politics nor religion. As a result of that, I can't help but think most participants are liberal.

We organize field trips, sports teams, dances, and other social opportunities for our kids.

[Carni]

46. Yep! I would imagine so!

I put up with enough of that crap now from neighbors I don't need to deal with more of it.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

52. Please...

Not everyone who homeschools is a Jesus crispy, as Rabrrrrr calls them...

[iconoclastic cat]

56. I was referring to that specific group mentioned in the article.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

65. I couldn't read the entire article

because I don't have an NYT subscription.

What group is she involved with?

[iconoclastic cat]

70. Use www.bugmenot.com for news passes

[GoddessOfGuinness]

75. None of the accounts work...

At least none of the 56 I tried... :(

[iconoclastic cat]

76. Okay, let me see...

[LiberallyInclined]

96. i don't have a NYT subscription, either- and i can see it the article...

it's free to registe, if i'm not mistaken.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

126. So what's the name of the group she's working with?

[DoveTurnedHawk]

104. Let Them Proselytize

Let them proselytize all they want, it's a free country, and I tend to doubt many kids will listen. Kids get proselytized at school every day, except the subjects generally relate to popularity, drinking, sex, even politics. So long as the proselytizing comes from other kids, and not the state or the school admin, let 'em go wild.

As for home schooled children participating in activities, I think they should be allowed to, for a fee. The kids are already going to be isolated and marginalized and potentially lacking in social adjustment, I don't think the solution is to exclude them. Rather, we should try to reach out to them so that there is less of a chance that they will grow up completely maladjusted vis-a-vis social interaction.

DTH

[mzmolly]

117. I like much of your post but take issue with ...

... I think they should be allowed to, for a fee. The kids are already going to be isolated and marginalized and potentially lacking in social adjustment, I don't think the solution is to exclude them. Rather, we should try to reach out to them so that there is less of a chance that they will grow up completely maladjusted vis-a-vis social interaction.

First, these parents pay a "fee" via taxes. Though, I am not opposed to a paying a small additionally fee personally.

And, home schooled kids learn to interact with MANY people, of all ages - including *gasp* other children. And, their interaction is generally quite healthy as opposed to being teased for not wearing Nike's or having the latest hairdo. Also, many publicly schooled kids come out of that system maladjusted vis-a-vis social interaction.

I think the myth that home schooled kids are not socially capable is quite odd. There is much misinformation and myth surrounding homeschooling and homeschooled kids.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

124. Your Point Is Well Taken

And I didn't mean to generalize all home schooled children. But from my understanding, one major complaint from such children and their parents alike is a lack or dearth of social opportunities. I would like to see more of these opportunities being made available.

DTH

[mzmolly]

128. I think that was true 20 years ago, but today there is such support

community among homeschoolers. I belong to a local "liberal" homeschooling group, and the kids take field trips etc. Also, most kids I know that homeschool are involved in a wealth of activities.

I do thank you for your open mind on this issue. And, I am certain there are kids who are a bit isolated, but the vast majority of homeschooled kids, I would argue, are not.

I think there are good cases to be made on both sides of this issue, and I like the fact that your posts put the kids first, because that's the correct mindset for all of us here.

:hi:

[Miss Chybil]

2. In Arizona Home Schoolers can participate in PE and sports, etc...

They can also enroll in specific classes, such as math.

[The Backlash Cometh]

3. This is already happening in Florida.

And believe me, the team concept seems to elude the one family I know that has paved the way. They walked in with a chip on their shoulder and everything has become fodder for their private crusade to prove that home schooling is better. I don't mind that they believe their child is polite in an old fashion way. I'll even agree it's true. But they've gone out of their way to make the rest of the public schoolers seem unruly, when they just may have a different sense of humor and can take a ribbing better. There is no way to ameliorate the situation. If you ignore them, they get offended, if you include them in the team bonding, they get offended. I don't think diversity and tolerance is something they learn at home.

[DBoon]

4. " don't think diversity and tolerance is something they learn at home"

and I suspect this is intentional.

[mzmolly]

111. There are many public schooled children who lack in diversity and

tolerance as well. I went to school with many racist/homophobes for example.

[lumpy]

5. Some of that money Bush

has spent pursuing his war duties could be spent to provide sports, pools, and similar activities for young people. There has always been a lack of public facilities for children activities and education. I see nothing wrong with providing public facilities for home schooled kids.

[The Backlash Cometh]

7. In my Republican county, they did away with intramural sports in

the middle school. Stupid trend we have here with the number of latch key kids that don't have anything to do afer school. Breaks my heart when they all go into high school and try out for sports they don't have a chance to make because wealthier parents have had their kids in private sports activities since their kids were 5.

[woodsprite]

39. Our YMCA's offer athletic programs for kids who are homeschooled. n/t

[kostya]

9. Neither do I lumpy, and I'm appalled by the lack of tolerance

and stereotyping of home-schoolers here in DU. We are not religious in our family and we are home-schooling our youngest for the basic reason that we feel he'll get a better education (such as learning how to teach himself and think for himself, not something taught in our public schools) than sitting with 30 other kids getting a boiled down curriculum designed to make it easier on the teacher not for the kids. We support all public school bond/levy issues and would gladly support increases in the number of teachers and increased salaries, so they can hire the best. However, as it is now, we are opting out. Since we pay our full share into the school system and are actually alleviating their chore by taking on the education of our child, I see no reason why we shouldn't be able to avail ourself of their services on some limited basis. - K

[Iowa]

40. As long as you brought up stereotyping...

it appears you have some strong feelings about the inferiority of the public schools, and those of us who elected to go that route. One thing I've noticed about the home school crowd - they are almost always quite certain that their way is the best way.

That being said, we actually considered home schooling, but my wife and I elected not to go that route for many reasons including these:

-- We wanted our kids to be exposed to more than we could offer (both good and bad) so we could deal with all the crap the world throws at them, and to do it while they were growing up. Our kids must eventually live in the real world; we didn't see the value in shielding them from it.
-- We support a strong public school system. It's one of the best things this country has going for it, and we believe that it weakens the public school system when strong families pull their kids out. For that reason I believe that we should actually encourage families who home school to participate in public school sports, band, and whatever classes they wish to take there. The more they're in our schools, the better, IMHO.
-- For the most part the public schools in our area are doing a decent job, and we view public school bashing in the same light that we view the Social Security "crisis" and all the bashing of other public services. It's driven by the privatization crowd, and if enough people repeat it, it will be assumed to be true. Sure, the schools need to make improvements, but by and large I would reject the notion the public schools are nothing more than a "boiled down curriculum designed to make it easier on the teacher". And I back that up some real life experience with the public schools: Our youngest was class valedictorian, National Merit Finalist, 31 composite ACT, recipient of an award based on character given to one student, and has a perfect 4.0 GPA in college so far. Our oldest was third in her HS class, class valedictorian at her public university, maintained a perfect 4.0 GPA throughout her undergraduate and graduate programs, makes more money than I ever made, and is only a few months from having her PhD. All this from a "boiled down curriculum designed to make it easier on the teacher". I'll compare my public schooled kids to home schooled kids any day.

My sister home schools her kids and I respect her for it, and I understand why she's doing it. She also respects my decision and understand the rationale. Good arguments can be made for both approaches. One isn't inherently superior to the other.

[kostya]

57. Thanks for the thoughtful observations

Sorry if I came across overly self-righteous, my bad. We have actually no certainty that our way is the best way, this is a new experiment for us, but we do believe it will result in at least as good an education as our public school would provide, with time left over for many extra-curricular activities that do indeed teach about "real life" (e.g. how many boys in public school are going to learn about household finances, cooking, cleaning, and shopping?). We have been and will continue to be strong supporters of public schools, we wish that they received more funding, we vote for the funds, but we are outnumbered by those who seem not to have sufficient respect for teachers and the difficult job they have.

I don't believe it is an effort to "shelter" our kid at all. In fact, I think that in many ways all schools are artificial replicas of real life at best. Nor do we intend to isolate our kid from society. On the contrary, we have discovered many homeschoolers in our area that regularly get together and they are from the whole spectrum in terms of why they homeschool (fundamentalist to secular). I do believe that public school tends to cater to the average and holds back kids that can move along faster than the rest of the crowd. There is a homogenization as a side effect as well.

I'm very happy for your kids, those are great success stories!! You are very fortunate. - K

[Iowa]

66. Thanks...

Something I meant to add in my original post but forgot... When we made our decision not to home school it was more than 20 years ago, and we live in a rural area with good public schools. Today (just in the past two years) our schools are slipping in the sense that the fundies are getting a foothold. We have a new superintendent and some new principals who aren't very bright. The super hands out bibles, allows fundies to pass out literature at school functions, etc. Plus they are implementing some really dumb, unnecessary, us vs. them, authoritarian policies that focus on the lowest common denominator; they're making our school a microcosm of a fascist state. In response the best teachers are taking early retirement, and the ones too young to retire are finding other jobs. IOW, the damned fundies are starting to rot the system from the inside. Those idiots ruin everything they touch! But that's just here - I hope it isn't widespread. Nevertheless, I'm not so sure our decision wouldn't be different if we were starting out today. It can be a tough call depending on where you live.

[cpamomfromtexas]

54. Mandatory Mental screening may make me home school

We are Christians but not the crazy kind. As a matter of fact, I don't think Robertson, Dobson, et al are Christians at all considering they lie and are "respectors of persons".

At any rate, we will consider homeschooling if the mandatory Mental Illness screening takes place. The people that control our government could identify the children whose parents are independent thinkers and totally mess the kids up on drugs thereby removing a challenge to the Nazi leaders in the future.

Call me crazy, but I think there's a game plan behind this mandatory screening concept.

I live in Texas and pay $900 a month property taxes, most of which goes to the schools, I want to be able to use at least a portion of that to help pay homeschooling expenses if necessary.

[redqueen]

8. Who cares?

If the district gets money based on how many children participate, who's harmed by this? In the case that the funds are based on enrollment in other classes, that's a whole other subject. I think in most extracurricular activities the parents fork over most of the cash for supplies and such, so really... what's the BFD?

[roguevalley]

43. Home school kids take money away from the system. The taxes

that people pay for the schools they take away in home school fees paid to someone else. Our school system loses about 2 grand a kid to home schooling. You pay your taxes and we give them back to you to pay for your homeschooling. To bring your kids to a system you abandoned is taking MORE than your fair share and deleting the resources left for the public schools.

You make a choice to leave. Then leave.

RV, retired from 27 years teaching and one year homeschooling my niece who needed a spanking and public school.

[Carni]

47. Can you clarify this?

Not being a smart ass...I honestly don't understand what you mean.

Do the homeschooling families get some kind of tax credit for homeschooling or do you mean the school loses Fed or state money because there are less kids enrolled?

I am not up on this topic at all!

[proud2BlibKansan]

87. School districts are funded by states

based on attendance. So yes, public schools lose money when kids are homeschooled.

I don't believe schools receive funding for extra curriculars so when homeschooled kids participate, it DOES cost the school district.

IMO, if parents want their kids to participate in extra curriculars, they should enroll their kids in the school.

[rinsd]

123. Point 2 is likely valid...

But how in the world does a child cost the school money by not attending AND not incurring any costs?

Are school funding formulas total bullshit then? Is this supposed per child spending likely not being spent on the child?

[proud2BlibKansan]

142. Because most homeschooled kids in my district

once attended public schools. I wonder if this is true of other homeschooled kids. Once they drop out of school, the district loses funding. Districts also project enrollment based on census data. When a school district decides to build a new school in a new neighborhood, they have spent years looking at population data and yes, counting the number of school aged kids in that attendance area. So by not attending the local public school, a student does indeed cost it money.

[rinsd]

144. Response....

Again if they no longer attend the school they are no longer incurring the costs associated with educating them. The same would be true of children going to private school or dropping out altogether.

"When a school district decides to build a new school in a new neighborhood, they have spent years looking at population data and yes, counting the number of school aged kids in that attendance"

They also factor in things such as private school attendance and I am sure it would be easy to quantify possible homeschoolers. Add to that that district building a new school likely is not hurting for funding.

"So by not attending the local public school, a student does indeed cost it money"

Again, how is the student costing the school money if the school does not have to spend that "lost" money educating the student?

[proud2BlibKansan]

150. I have tried to explain it as simply as I can

Kids who do not attend public schools are lost revenue to school districts.

[rinsd]

153. Phrased differently....

Kids who do not attend public schools do not cost the school money to actually educate them.

Again there are differences between charter schools & vouchers and private schools and homeschooling.

The former, funding designated to educate via the public system is lost to other forms of schools.

In the latter, funding designated to educate via public schools is regurgitated into the public school system. And since any funding received by an individual school is for educating the children, if the child is not incurring the cost of actually being educated, the funding is not "lost"

[proud2BlibKansan]

156. Yes the funding is lost

when any child does not attend the public school.

If you owned a store and I didn't shop there, you wouldn't be getting my money, now would you? It's actually very simple.

[roguevalley]

98. The money is budgeted for them and they take it to put into a

private program or the school's ditsy assed home school program. I know because my niece had a year with me as tutor- something I will NEVER do again- and she got about 2k from the district for me to buy things from any place I wanted. She had the plan made and I bought the materials. The catalogs that they use for home school are filled with demented stuff as well as normal.

[redqueen]

48. Actually, if you'd read the article, you'd know that's not always the case

Where it is the case, I can see the problem.

How many states did you teach in?

[Orsino]

55. If they're not registered as students...

...don't make teachers/staff responsible for minding them at events. If they're getting vouchers, keep 'em out altogether.

[proud2BlibKansan]

88. Another factor that is forgotten here

is liability insurance. What if a homeschooled kid joins the local high school football team and gets hurt? I know where I teach, the school district's insurance plan does NOT cover kids who are NOT students.

[kostya]

58. What state do you live in?

I never heard of a school district paying someone to homeschool. I pay the same taxes regardless of whether I homeschool or not and no one reimburses us for our expenses. Just how would we be a drain on the school system. If it costs 2 grand to teach a kid and your district lost 2 grand, why is there a net loss?

Sorry that you feel you must hit a child to teach them something. Seems like you must've missed something along the way in your 27 years if you haven't figured out how to motivate children without whacking them. Would you whack a grown adult if they were "misbehaving"? That's known as assault and battery.

You are setting a great example for why I'd want to keep my kid out of public school with teachers like you. - K

[roguevalley]

97. Oh please. The last half of your letter makes me laugh. Keep your

kid in or out but if you're out, be out. Don't come wincing back because you want them to play the flute. If you are going to be the teacher, teach.

[Malva Zebrina]

10. When the homeschooling movement started

the question of the lack of social connections was brought up frequently by those who advocated public school education. Nevertheless, many chose to homeschool, many of them for religious reasons.

Social connections, and the learning experienced from those connections in the public school environment, was said to be missing from the home school education format.

Looks like these kids are athletic and need competition,--- not a surprise for teenagers. Perhaps they are even athletically gifted and can shine, would they attend the public school. I know of one large family, modest in income, whose sons were athletically gifted, who went on to college with an athletic scholarship.

See, that is not generally available to home schooled childre, even if they are athletically gifted. Suddenly, protective parents,find they are missing something for their "tax dollars" and now seek to promote their kids after they have thumbed their noses at the lower , and less educated public school kids.

Further, sooner or later mums and dads, one must let go of the kids. It is in the nature of this thing called "life" and is obvious to anyone who studies nature.

You cannot have them near and around you forever and may do damage by insisting upon being the ultimate in authority over their lives no matter how old they are. I have seen this type of parenting continue on with children who are in their forties.

In fact, I think that letting them go out into society, that is the society of competition with peers, is a far harder task, taking far more concentration for parents as they upbring their children, and takes a great deal more of patience and skill than those who control their every movement from dawn to sunset.

One cannot protect their adolescent children from the "deviants" that attend public schools, and then expect to have their tax dollars work for them as far as public schooling goes in order that their kids get those lacking benefits they shunned in the first place.

It would seem they want their cake and they want to eat it too.

Meanwhile, pulling their little darlings out of the corrupt and decrepit public school system that does not treat their little, genius darlings right because it teaches the religion of native Americans alongside with Christianity,( a definate persecution of Christians) and because prayer to their god, is not allowed to be connected in anyway to that school (we of no religion, or of other religions, also taxpayers, object strenously to that), need to understand that their god does not rule in a public school, even if they do pay taxes.

Seems they have been lacking something in their homeschooling.
A chance for their gifted, of course, children to compete in sports. Next, I suspect they will be complaining that their kids are not competing also in other areas (honor society and the like, so they cannot put a sticker on their car bragging of their child's accomplishments) not having to do with sports.

Perhaps a good idea would be that the homeschoolers can all get together and form a sports club, where their athletically gifted children, all can then engage in those sports, rather than demanding the place they originally scorned, be required to "give" it to their sports lacking children because they paid for it and now all those other low public school educated kids are taking THEIR money to win scholarships.

[redqueen]

11. Why all the hostility toward homeschoolers / homeschooled children?

If the parents still have to pay taxes, and the funds come from the state based on how many children participate in whatever activity, what's the big problem with letting these children participate?

[tjdee]

12. For two reasons:

1--People think most homeschoolers are fundamentalist Christians (don't know if that's actually true). See the first reply about the homeschooled kids "proselytizing".

2--The very act of removing children from public school seems to imply "I think I'm better than you"ness. May not be the case, but some feel homeschooling parents are basically saying "your school is not good enough for my kid", I can see some people saying "then neither are our dumpy athletic activities". If a parent can homeschool, they are probably better off financially than others as well. (That is a factor in my jealousy of them, LOL!) I see homeschooled kids almost like private school kids, in that regard.

[redqueen]

19. But if we know it's wrong, shouldn't we try to stop?

I don't think the majority of homeschoolers are religious. I know I'd do it in a heartbeat if I could, not because I want them learning more religious whatever... but because I don't think the classroom environment at the school in our area is conducive to learning.

Inferiority complexes ... that's great. One would hope people might grow out of that by the time they're parents. Guess not.

Regarding income and homeschooling... I don't understand it. Does it cost a lot of money to homeschool? Many of the low-income families in my neighborhood are low-income partially because the moms are SAHM's.

[tjdee]

24. I agree with you.

I think I'd homeschool my kid if I didn't have to work...and, if she had a sibling. I am not thrilled with public schools at all.

I don't think it costs a lot of money to homeschool, but if a parent can stay home with the kid, that means you have the disposable income to do that. The low income families in your area that are so in part because of a homeschooling mom...I see your point, and that's sometimes true. Obviously their kid's education is more important than a second paycheck, and that's good. But the homeschoolers I've known have all been suburban housewives whose hubbies made enough to keep them in the suburbs--and they *could* homeschool their kid because of that financial security. It's not like the people in inner city ghettoes have the luxury of not working even if they *want* to homeschool, for example.

[redqueen]

26. Nah these moms don't homeschool.

They're home all day, but the school age kids go to school.

My one kid who's old enough to go to school loves school... but she also likes the idea of me teaching her at home. After she was choked by a classmate in kindergarten, I started thinking seriously about homeschooling. Right now I'm working on changing careers so that I can get a job which will allow me the flexibility to teach her and her sister while still working full time. I hope it works out!

[Igel]

22. Well, in the case of (1), people should track down facts

before making assumptions. The home school movement first gained widespread popularity among counterculture members, then spread to the Xian "counterculture." Now it's spread to all sorts of different groups, for all sorts of reasons.

Removing children from public school occurs for all sorts of reasons. Some certainly feel their kids are better; if they're right, and the schools can't accommodate *their* special needs, what's the problem?

I knew one single father who yanked his could out of school at the end of 8th grade because he resented evolution being taught; at age 18, he was reading at a 7th grade level.

Then again, I knew another family who pulled their teenager out of school because she went from a B+ student to C- in her freshman year, placing in the bottom third of test takers; the parents blamed her friends. At the end of the first year, she tested 5 months ahead of her peers, and by the end of her sophomore year she had finished enough coursework to pass the senior exam. She got her high school diploma a year ahead of her peers.

Many homeschooling parents aren't well off. Most are middle class. Few are upper class. Many are lower class. (I had an acquaintance who's dissertation was on home schoolers ... she was a wealth of information on the subject.)

[tblue37]

31. You might want to take a look at one of my essays

on my Teacher, Teacher website: "The Inmates Are Running the Asylum"
http://www.teacherblue.homestead.com/inmates.html

I teach college English (and have since 1972).

When my now-adult kids were in grade school, I did volunteer teaching several times a week in their classrooms. I always filled in the educational gaps the school left by implementing enrichment at home. Both of my kids are doing quite well. In fact, my med school daughter won a Fulbright Fellowship to do research and take a higher degree in Social policy at Trinity University in Dublin next year.

Generally I think US public education is a disaster, but when my kids were young I felt I could balance the problems with effort on my part. I am poorly paid adjunct faculty, so I didn't have the money or free time to fully home school, though I would have if I had felt it truly necessary. But I am a very good tutor, and I tutor in all subjects at all levels, except for math beyond 7th grade and science beyond 10th-grade biology.

Even then, I wanted the resources public school could provide for the kids (band, drama club, school magazine, ceramics class, etc.), do I worked within the system.

But as I explain in "The Inmates are Running the Asylum," I would never let my kids attend public school if they were still of school age. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, I could still work within the system. But after a year working as a substitute in our local school district (as an adjunct faculty member, I have to have part time jobs to supplement my income--that year, subbing was one of the jobs I took), I am convinced that for most kids, in our area at least, public school is not a disaster, but a real catastrophe.

I also tutor kids at all levels from our local public schools, and I am appalled at what is not being done to teach them. You can't blame the teachers, though. They have too many kids, too little control, too little pay, too much stress, and all sorts of other constraints.

I live in the city that is home to the University of Kansas. As a college town, Lawrence supposedly has better public schools than most, but I have taught in these schools and tutored their students, and I assure you it is pretty bad. I can't even imagine how bad schools in other parts of the state must be!

So if my kids were of school age now, I would definitely home school them, no matter whether I could afford it or not. And if I did, I would like to be able to enroll them in activities that I as a taxpayer am funding for public school students.

BTW, I am not at all religious, not even slightly. I am, however, concerned about the anti-intellectual, socially repressive, pop culture atmosphere at school. I write about it in many essays on my site. Here is one:
"It's Stupid to Be Smart"
http://www.teacherblue.homestead.com/stupidsmart.html

Many home schoolers are Christian fundamentalists who want to prevent their kids from learning important things or thinking on their own. But some just want their kids to get a reasonable education.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

67. Well said.

And some of us want our kids to get a reasonable education free from the fear of being mugged on the way to class...

[phylny]

71. It's a shame that where so many people live, there are inferior schools.

I guess we've been extraordinarily lucky.

We have three daughters, and they have attended public schools in Indiana, Illinois, Virginia, and New York. Our oldest now attends a public university, although a rather prestigious (academics-wise) one that was very hard to get into.

In a combined 32 years of public schooling (not counting college: K-12, K-10, and K-7) between all three of them, not only have we NOT had a complaint about ANY teacher (not ONE teacher in all those years), but the girls have had educations that I am proud and in awe of. They've been educated in every state in a way that I could never have done justice to if I taught them myself (and I have two undergrad degrees and a Master's).

Again, I guess somehow we've been lucky.

[Carni]

50. I disagree with you about people opting out of public school system

Regarding #1-- I tend to agree with you and it turns me off to homeschooling.

But regarding #2-- My kid doesn't go to public schools (attends a Montessori school)but it isn't because I hate the public schools!

I wish I wasn't paying for a private school.

My daughter is pretty advanced in some areas (like way above grade level)and my school district doesn't offer any kind of accelerated program (plus her social maturity level is typical of her age so she needs to be with kids her own age IMO)

By the time she is in a position to take electives in the higher grades this problem should solve itself, but for grade school we felt stuck with going this route.

My whole point is everyone that opts out of the system isn't a snob...
Some of us are just stuck with unusual situations that we didn't necessarily choose to be burdened with!

[GoddessOfGuinness]

62. "Better off financially"? Not in my case.

I homeschool because I want to spend more than 2 hours with my kid before I go to work in the evenings as a freelance violinist. I'm glad that I've found an academic program that teaches about many different cultures and religions without proselytizing.

Yes, the school system stinks. My older boy went through hell (physical as well as emotional) in spite of the volunteer work I did for the school; and I won't watch the same thing happen to my younger one. Our local elementary school is up for state takeover if it doesn't improve this year though the state hasn't actually taken anything over thus far...only threatened.

We recently joined a network of homeschoolers that participate in sports, go on field trips, and attend social events together. We don't discuss politics or religion; and the ethnic composition of the group is as varied as in the county where I live.

I can understand why people are intolerant of homeschoolers; but I'm sorry to see that opinionated ignorance takes precedence over researching the matter.

People homeschool their kids for many reasons. It doesn't work for everybody; but it offers another option in what should be a wide variety of educational choices. Every kid is different. Every kid should have the chance to learn the best way he or she can.

[sybylla]

30. In my state, the schools loose funding when parents home school

If those kids want to participate in athletics (have their cake and eat it too) then they need to pay their share of the costs of it or persuade the legislators to allow schools to recoup the costs per homeschool pupil through taxes.

It's simple.

I have no particular negative feelings for home schoolers. But much of this they bring on themselves. The only homeschooling families I've known, do so because they want to indoctrinate their kids and don't want them exposed to the public school environment where - shame of all shame - freethinking might be taught. (rural schools in Wisconsin tend to be very good so there is little other reason to homeschool). In every circumstance, to cover for their fundamentalist indoctrination, they bash the local public schools as unworthy, poorly disciplined, and more. How are the families who send their kids to public school supposed to feel about the families of homeschoolers now wanting to pick and choose the best parts of both worlds?

Personally, like someone described above, I think it puts the homeschooled kids at a serious disadvantage on the team when their parents, in what appears to be many circumstances, bash the public schools and their publically educated peers. Unless you have a coach who is sensitive to it, these kids will never rise above their parents prejudices to become a team. Not to mention the fact that I can just imagine every time a homeschooler sits the bench a little more than others, the hue and cry of the parents in this situation.

As a homeschooling family, I can't imagine putting my kids in that kind of situation unless I wanted to turn my children into professional victims as adults.

[kostya]

59. You need to get out and meet more homeschoolers, they come in all flavors

The only homeschooling families I've known, do so because they want to indoctrinate their kids and don't want them exposed to the public school environment where - shame of all shame - freethinking might be taught.

Yes, it's been a long time since I've been in public school, but from what I've seen around here through high school, I wouldn't say it's changed much. "Free thinking" is not on the curriculum nor does it seem to be tolerated much. I'd just be happy if they had classes to teach kids how to think critically and how to learn themselves, instead of them having to simply absorb and regurgitate. - K

[rinsd]

63. How is funding "lost" if the child isn't incurring any expenses?

Do the parents get a tax rebate?

[GoddessOfGuinness]

77. Good question...

How much funding is lost per child?

[proud2BlibKansan]

89. In my district

last I heard it was well over $5,000. Someone else on this thread posted that it was $2000 in their district. It's a significant amount, especially in these days of cut budgets and reduced state funding.

[rinsd]

102. What is that based on though?

Is that just a number thrown out?

What is the basis of getting that number?

If its # of students eligible vs. students actually enrolled then its bullshit.

Even then how can a school lose funding by not having a student who by virtue of not being there is not incurring any costs?

[proud2BlibKansan]

131. The state pays the school district for every kid who is enrolled

in school. It is different in every state and I believe different districts in the same state get different amounts (the cost of education varies in urban vs rural vs suburban districts).

The reason a school district loses funding is because the child is not enrolled. In my state, daily attendance figures are submitted to the state and our funding is based on that. So if a student is absent, the district loses money.

My district has lost 20% of our kids to charter schools in the past 5 years. So we have also lost 20% of our state funding. Budget decisions are made based on expected enrollment, so when enrollment drops, budgets are cut.

A few kids who are pulled out of school to be homeschooled do not make that much difference to school budgets. But a movement of large numbers of kids does indeed have an effect.

As far as homeschooled kids being eligible for extra curriculars, those activities do cost money and school districts are not reimbursed for them. So why should they extend the privilege of participating in extra curriculars to kids who aren't enrolled? From a financial perspective, districts probably cannot afford it.

[rinsd]

145. The charter school argument is different...

...like vouchers they spend actual taxes to educate a student in a non public school.

That doesn't apply to home schoolers unless the state is giving them some type of stipend(which may be the case in some districts) to educate their own children.

"As far as homeschooled kids being eligible for extra curriculars, those activities do cost money and school districts are not reimbursed for them. So why should they extend the privilege of participating in extra curriculars to kids who aren't enrolled? From a financial perspective, districts probably cannot afford it. "

I think a fee would solve this issue.

[proud2BlibKansan]

148. Both homeschoolers and charter school kids

represent lost revenue to schools.

A fee would solve the financial issue of allowing homeschoolers to participate in extra curriculars, but we still have the problem of minimum GPA requirements, or no pass no play policies.

[rinsd]

152. I just don't accept that premise....

...if a public school is not educating the child and funding is not provided to the homeschooler than the district is not losing funding unless monies alloted and per student spending etc are all bullshit. If the student isn't incurring an actual cost, then the loss of their funding is moot. Unless you're saying schools should be able to retain funding for students they are not educating. I believe that is something alot of schools have gotten in trouble for over the years(ie; keeping dropouts on the enrollment in high school)

If a public school is not educating the child but they are attending a charter or private school with the assistance of the state, then certainly its costing the public system money.

[Flavin]

121. Funding for schools...

As a school treasurer in a Midwestern state let me chime in, IE Finances.

School financing varies from state to state.
In some states districts receive X$s (base funding) + Y$s per student, so that there is a base funding level received by all schools.
In some states the funding is simply Y $'s per student.
In some states the per child the Y$s distributed are based only upon LOCAL property taxes.
In addition every qualifying school district in the nation receives Z $s per student for an alphabet soup of federal programs such as Chapter 1 (basically reading), Some Chapter 9 funding (Phys Ed), school lunch programs, etc. These funds are restricted to certain programs, uses. etc.

In some states funding is based upon a collection of the whole of their state's school levy, forwarded to the state level and then distributed "fairly" to all schools, established by the often complicated formula of Free and Reduced Lunch totals, English as a second Language, Special Ed populations, etc. This establishes a base level of funding followed by a per student.
This is what occurs in my state as required by the state constitution which calls for equal education for all.
In my state, if you home school (which gets NO support from the state, IE supportive funding and therefor not much oversight) the school loses the Base Funding, any per-student funding, AND all that federal money. It is a sizable chunk, the state funding alone in nearly $4000+ a year and in my district due to the Socio-economics in my city the Federal monies is nearly that.
Now wheres the problem, since we appear to be rolling in dough?
When you withdraw you child to home school you remove all the funding your child would have brought into the district.
And now you want to bring your baby back onto campus to pick the best fruit from the tree.... and you want to borrow our ladder to do it.
Plant you own damned trees.

Rant follows:

The following bit strays from the direct funding question to that of the uses of the monies. Sure we get what looks like a chunk of moo la every year. Buuuuttttt:
Yearly our salary base increases as state law requires constant teacher education. This education moves teachers into higher pay brackets almost every year. Remember you require only the best for your babies. (and before you get started, My spouse, MS in educ., Masters degree, 8 yrs exp. = 30K)
Your "Clients" constantly ask for an increase in "product" (IB, AP, extra curriculars, etc) while asking you to do so with less and less real $'s a year. Home schoolers do not have to perform to the standards required by the No Child Left Behind law (what, are they going to send you baby to a different parent if you fail to meet standards :P?)
Every year the mighty textbook and educational supply companies squeeze us a little tighter. Note: we recently looked at updating an adopted textbook for World History, Hell, ours were 5 years old. They cost in 1999 $45 each. The new 2005 eds. now cost $70 each.
Yearly our social services requirements are increased by (usually) well-meaning legislators. After all, in allot of cases, the schools are a bastion of stability for kids with no stability at home and we do have them for a solid 8-ish hours a day.
Hell, have the schools feed them breakfast, lunches, and in some districts dinner.
How about social workers, why not.
How about health care, somebodies got to do it.
How about mandatory mental health screenings, to sort out the scary ones.
How about state sponsored drug training.... Etc. etc.
Get it?
Do you have to provide security guards to protect your baby from another parents baby who has a death wish. Parents require US to.
(and "choked child parent".... Best check to see what sis is doing to bro when your back is turned).
Now you complain that "well I am paying my taxes.... why should I not get to use the facilities." In our metro area those who are complaining the most about educational finances, have the best schools in THE STATE.
They either do not want their babies to have any social competition when entering college (so let the other schools rot), or they think that their taxes should 'get them something'.
YOU ARE PAYING TAXES AS A SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY!
Where did you get the idea that you would and should receive ANYTHING for having done so?

This is the root of the anger toward home schoolers. You say the public schools are "horrible, disastrous, etc." You sat back as taxpayers, not involved because it wasn't "my school" or "my kids have already graduated" or "there Inter-city schools,... you KNOW" or blah blah. You chose not to fix the problem. Now you have the bed you shat in. Now you choose not to sleep in it; but you will take the pillows (sports, arts, IB programs, AP classes), thank you.

Every school in the state is every parent's responsibility.
You have received the public education you have made.\

Rant over for the time being till you tax complainers/education critics open your mouths again.

Chris

[GoddessOfGuinness]

127. Then the issue should be brought up with those responsible...

IE: Your legislators.

Stop putting parents down for wanting to give their kids an education tailored to their needs. End rant.

[politicat]

170. Thank you, Chris!

Beautifully said.

I'm not a parent. I have no direct interest in the schools, save for wanting the citizens who are running this place when I'm 80 to be competent and compassionate and effective. My other interest is that schools shape the kids I work with when I'm being a shrink and when their environment is at least reasonably healthy, they do better.

And I am STUNNED that school admins and teachers do as well as they do with what they're forced to deal with.

Especially when they get the kids who have been homeschooled for a couple of years in a classroom because mom's going back to work or dad lost his job and doesn't have the patience to be a teacher.... The kids who have no social skills, no study skills, and expect to have 100% of the teachers' attention. That such teachers do not hand in their resignations immediately makes me gaze at them with wonder and awe. That such teachers manage to work with the other kids and the former homeschoolers and make the process work is even more incredible.

I am the product of the public schools. I went to average schools and got a very good education not all that long ago, though it was pre NCLB. So did my sisters. All three of us went to uni on scholarship in demanding fields (Psychology, International Affairs and Forensic Chemistry). Our parents worked with the system - they never took the stance that we were better or deserved better than what was offered. We weren't trained to be small elitists who couldn't be bothered to be be with those other children who might be different. We were brought up to be citizens and democrats, single citizens in a larger group. I'm glad they raised us as they did.

I'm not fond of home schooling; I don't think most people are equipped intellectually and emotionally to deal with a child twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. It takes a village.... and schools are integral parts of villages. At the clinic I work at, we get a lot more emergency calls and crisis calls from the families that home school or alternative school than from the families in public or private schools. That says something. What? I don't know... I haven't had the time to do a full study... but the correlation is interesting.

[mzmolly]

172. Do you have any evidence of this:

"The kids who have no social skills, no study skills, and expect to have 100% of the teachers' attention."

Your post is highly inaccurate and highly insulting.

I also find this very hard to believe:

"I don't think most people are equipped intellectually and emotionally to deal with a child twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. It takes a village.... and schools are integral parts of villages. At the clinic I work at, we get a lot more emergency calls and crisis calls from the families that home school or alternative school than from the families in public or private schools. That says something. What? I don't know... I haven't had the time to do a full study... but the correlation is interesting."

If one is not equip to deal with children, they should not have any. Also, many people DEAL with children 24/7 before they attend public school, how on earth do they manage? In fact, people did so before public school existed. What a ridiculous notion that parents are not capable of raising their children. For the record, most people who home school have families/friends and a life beyond their children.

Regarding your clinic story, your including "alternative schooling" in your so called data, and that's not related, period. Most kids in alternative schools are the product of public schools first, not home schooling. So, as to the claim that home schooled families are more apt to be in crisis, I think it's bullshit.

[mzmolly]

173. This is in YOUR state. If schools are strapped, it's not the fault of

home schoolers. I would venture to guess that in your state, home schooled children do not participate in classes/events? If that's the case, your situation/rant does not apply.

Also, schools have had funding issues for as long as I can remember. We should be more concerned about the "every child left behind" legislation as which is part of the reason some are choosing to home school.

Also, in MY state if a child is enrolled in October that child is funded whether or not that child stays in school for the remainder of the year. My child was enrolled - thus we helped "plant trees" for the entire year, though we were not enrolled beyond November 1st. I guess I planted someone else's tree huh? I don't look at it that way however. I think ALL schools should be well funded and I don't mind contributing in the least. However, I can't imagine having the bitter attitude toward any group of children that some here have against home schooled children.

For the record I am not an education critic/tax complainer. Shall I assign you a label too? How bout home schooled child hater? Like that label thing? I don't think it's fair personally.

I am simply stating the facts in my state as they pertain to taxes and education. PERIOD.

Also, I have no problem having home schooling families pay a fee, or not allowing participation at all - if state funding is effected. I just think it would be best to find a way to stabilize funding and include as many children as we can in the community at large. I would like to see a win/win situation for children personally. I think it's beneficial if home schooled children can meet and interact with public schooled children, and visa versa. I haven't a clue as to why anyone would object to that if funding not an issue? And if funding is THE issue, let's address it and not profess that excluding children from activities is the answer.

If a home schooled child is enrolled in any class/activity in public school, I think funding should be increased, I am certain there is a way to factor this in.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

78. If legislators use homeschooling as an excuse to

inadequately fund the public schools; then the taxpayers need to raise hell...including those who homeschool and those who send their kids to private school, since their tax dollars are funding public schools as well.

The solution to this problem is not to denigrate those who are simply seeking to educate their children using the method they believe is best according to their circumstances.

[Malva Zebrina]

35. My opinion

I happen to think that only those children whose parents are fairly well educated and who have the time--ie all day to spend educating their children because they cannot stand the public school system, are, in this respect, wanting to use the rest of the things they shunned in the first place because it sucked, are the elite.

I also happen to think that it robs those children whose parents are not educated, who work all day, who are exhausted when they come home, of the same type of one on one education. I also happen to think that it is setting the stage for some sort of class disctions,

But suddenly they find that their homeschooled child is missing something. Social contacts , sports, music and perhaps a few other things--debating societies, etc and , sorry to say, but it looks like the attitude is that the other children, whose moms and dads have to work all day, and maybe half the night, in the ever increasing low funded public schools, are getting something from THEIR tax dollars. It comes off as petulant-- "how dare they use my money to, say, get a scholarship to a college when my kid was not even allowed to be in the competition.

my two cents. I firmly believe in a public school education where every child is given the same opportunity to begin life as an adult equipped with the tools necessary to allow them to be a valuable and contributing member of society. I think that is what makes a society strong and healthy. I am disturbed that the child with the working parents gets less and less because I believe that valuable potential is lost by that.

This latest complaint is actually a continuation of the original argument when the home schooling movement first began--it was argued by homeschooling parents then, that they should get a tax refund if they homeschooled their child. That kind of dwindled out over time for the argument made no sense, considering how many people's tax dollars go into public education who do not have a single kid, and never had a single kid attend a public school,and who were not demanding a tax refund,--- but now we see they want to pick and choose, go back and forth, between the crummy public school with the good athletic program, and the private schooling at home.

Perhaps those who are tax payers but who have no children at all involved in the school system, should demand they are entitled to go there for lunch--like senior citizens who are in need. Or perhaps they should demand they get their tax dollar's worth by demanding other things they need--a place to meet and socialize. After all, the building just sits there on weekends and over the summer with no one using it.

[proud2BlibKansan]

90. Excellent post

:)

[silvermachine]

42. Best post on this thread.

Thanks!

[kostya]

64. Hardly the best post...

It's full of the same old tired stereotypes about homeschoolers, that they are "missing" something, not being socialized, are probably religious, blah, blah, blah. Another unresearched opinion based on impressions, probably through the mass media.

Or, it could be a bit of envy, since homeschooling can't be practically done by everyone and I'm sure some suspect it might be better for their kid, but they can't spend the time to do it.

I spent nearly a year researching homeschooling methods, materials, and meeting with many parents who do it and for many different reasons. They are all quite successful at it and are open, successful people themselves. They are not doing it because they are trying to put their kids in a compound.

In fact, there are many activities for kids in our area to meet with other kids (and not just of their same grade level) as well as lots of sports activities In fact, I'd say they get more opportunities for extra-curricular activities, not just sports, because you can keep your kid at or above grade level with about 2-3 hours of instruction a day instead of the 6-7 it takes the public school to do it. - K

[Malva Zebrina]

83. well then

let us all do away with the public school system, It sucks, right? Why should you give your money to it, when home schooling does a better job? Right? All the kids should be home schooled.

Let us tear down all the public schools, and let those students left hanging there because their parents do not have the time to spend all day homeschooling them, because they work, go to hell. right?

What do you suggest should be done with "them"?

Their parents should not have to work and should quit their jobs in order to home school their children, even though they are illiterate themselves . What to do with em all?

[kostya]

92. Your words, not mine. Show me where I said anything of that nature

[The Straight Story]

79. Personally I see this way off the mark

I know many homeschooled kids, including my nieces and nephews.

1. Social skills: they meet up with many kids of varied ages on a regular basis. They have no problem relating to people of all ages because they are not boxed in year after year into only hanging with people of their own age.

2. Protective parents term: There is something wrong with this why?? Our local dem school superintendent is mulling putting her kid into a private school. Is tha protective or a simple analysis of the system and wanting the best for your child?

3. Protecting them from deviants in school: again, is this bad? We don't put up with that crap in the real world at work (most places I have worked) why put up with it in school?

4. Sports: If so many think homeschooled kids are harmed by not interacting with others why not let them unless you want to punish them for making a choice? Sports is something different then daily education. Sure they can (and do in some cases) have their own sports teams (and things like awana) so where is the direct harm in letting them play in their district just because they choose a seperate path outside the daily activities? Show me the harm versus the benefits for all involved, I would like to see it.

5. You cannot have them near and around you forever and may do damage by insisting upon being the ultimate in authority over their lives no matter how old they are - that is a broad brush and an attack in general on something you do not seem to like. Does this mean that they should have a public teacher being the ultimate authority or a school system? Most those I see who teach at home want to control the pace and level of knowledge - something I could have benefitted from had my parents chose that option. I was bored in school, why did it take 9 months to learn trig? I learned it in weeks and helped out seniors with their homework when I was in 10th grade. I got so bored I dropped out. To paint people with such a broad brush is to gloss over the variety and diversity of the reasons people homeschool.

[Malva Zebrina]

82. good

that is your opinion. I have stated mine and I believe in it being a hopeless liberal in favor of public school system.

I am not convinced that homeschooled people are the variety and diversity of the population. The ones I have been in contact with, are not diverse by any means and do not exhibit any variety.

I am convinced it has become a elitist venture. There is no variety to be claimed when homeschooling depends upon an adult who has the freedom to spend the time in that venture, while the working parents, who may not even be literate, cannot and do not pursue that.

That does not mean that their children are dumb and uneducatable.

That, indeed, is the unfair broad brush that homeschoolers seek to avoid by separatingtheir children from this entity that upsets their own children's ability to learn, as they see it.

It means that their children are the ones in the public school system and are the ones who need the education in order to rise above the situation of the parents, and that has been the tradition of our country with many of our immigrants, since it began. That they can do so, in spite of their parent's education, contributes to the health of our society.

A literate society is far more healthy and strong than one that is forced to educate their children in underfunded public schools where their education is at risk. Taking money from the public school system is relegating these children to an education that is lesser than.

And then, after taking the children from these schools, they suddenly discover that their own children are missing something, dammit, and they are paying for the lesser to exceed their own kids in things such as athletics. There is a class warfare here, as I see it.

It is fine that you are satisfied with your home schooling. Nevermind the seniors. Their ecucation encompassed more than any in today's world. I suspect this because I found a textbook dating to the 1850's in my attic that public school students used. Amusingly there was a tally in the front of it listing the attendance record of the twenty student in the class. It included Greek mythology and it included studies in world literature that was taught to 8th grade students and vocabulary that I suspect would not even be recognized by high school seniors today.

I am sure that you are not missing a thing when it comes to social interactions, especially interacting with seniors whose education and knowledge goes probably far beyond that of yours, at least their wisdom based upon life experience, is beyond yours, but go ahead and teach them in your home schooled wisdom. They have a lot to learn from you.

But to add further, as applies to the subject of this thread, you are not a teen, anxious to compete in sports, are you?

[wickerwoman]

179. I used to teach in public schools

and no way in hell will my kids be going there. And it isn't because I'm afraid they'll be damaged or bullied or exposed to ideas I don't believe. It's because public schooling is a phenomenal waste of time for most kids. I read somewhere that the average public school kid during a 6 hour day spends 15 minutes on task and actually learning. And I believe it. My kindergarteners had six recesses a day. I'm not saying that kids don't need that time to run around, I'm saying that the average school day is padded beyond belief to keep kids there while their parents are working. I'll bet I spent the better part of an hour every day getting kids to stand in a straight line so I could march them off to another recess. Imagine how much a kid could do with the gift of 3 or 4 hours of free time given back to them and not spent standing around while the teacher tries to get everyone into line.

[mbperrin]

13. One big problem would be recruiting athletes with no need for

academic performance. Got a kid with great athletic ability, but struggling academically? He/she fails a class in public school, they're out of contention athletically. So just withdraw the kid from school and "homeschool" them, because nobody checks to see if any schooling is going on there at all.

This would create an exempt class of talented athletes without the need to be a "student-athlete." Long-term, it's lousy, because the homeschooled have real problems with admissions to major colleges, and many of their budding college careers would come to an abrupt end.

Doesn't seem to serve the kid's longer term interest. Better idea seems to be private leagues, where everyone's on the same footing.

[MaineDem]

Excellent point

I hadn't considered the academically ineligible issue. I wonder now how that's handled here in Maine. I'll have to look that up.

[Bridget Burke]

18. Only so many kids can "make the team"

Why should public school kids get bumped, especially when scholarships are possible? Too many schools are cutting art & music for lack of funding. Why should these limited resources be strained even further? In many states, schools are funded according to the number of regularly registered students.

I know a homeschooling family that takes their kids to special classes--art, etc. They set these up with other homeschoolers. Athletic programs for kids exist outside of public schools--but they may not lead to scholarships.

[redqueen]

20. Nobody is checking on homeschooled children?

Are you sure about that? Where is it that that is the case?

I know here in TX, they do monitor the children's progress... I'm very curious to know which states just forget about homeschooled children.

[Igel]

23. From what I've read, they do a crappy job monitoring a kid's progress.

We moved to Tx a year ago, and intend to homeschool when our kid's old enough. Apparently a written curriculum, with bare-bones minimum requirements, is all that's necessary. Homeschoolers are considered private schools.

I'd like to know that they administer standard tests, but as of a few years ago the official homeschooler association's stance was this wasn't required by law. I hope it's changed.

From time to time their numbers are great enough to form homeschool orchestras or choirs.

[redqueen]

25. Interesting...

I was told there was yearly testing... now I google and find out there's none... at all. Rather shocking, actually.

Strange... since most stuff I've read indicates homeschooled students do very well.

[Igel]

28. Some that I've known have done very, very well.

Others, really, really poorly.

I'm hoping that if we home school, our kid(s?) turn out on the "very well" side of things.

[mbperrin]

33. I'm in Texas, too, and am in my 10th year of teaching. Don't

get mixed up between "Homeschooled" children, who are being taught at home due to a long illness or other disability by their regular teachers, who liase through the "Homeschool" teacher who does indeed give instruction, pick up assignments and so, directed by the teachers.

No state agency, no local agency, no district agency is charged with monitoring, testing, or checking on children being schooled at home by their parents. Private schools, yep, home schoolers, nope.

[lastliberalintexas]

37. Texas doesn't do squat to monitor homeschoolers

And the religious right here has made darn sure over the years that the state did nothing to change that fact. Homeschooling has been a huuuuge issue in some races, even those for the TEA!

I have a thankfully distant cousin who homeschooled her children until her parents threated to call CPS and/or sue for custody, so she finally put them in public schools. Even so, the older child ended up having to buy a diploma in Louisiana. (no offense to DUers from LA! :) )

And that is much of the problem with homeschooling- there seems to be no middle ground. On one end of the spectrum you have children who are bright, articulate and able to "graduate" 1 or 2 years earlier than they would have in a "real" school, whether public or private. On the other hand, you have 16 year olds who can't read. All without state monitoring, all with an entire industry out there just waiting to take these parents' money.

It might begin improving now, since I've heard that there are more and more parents choosing to homeschool for non-religious reasons. Maybe the states will go against the political clout of the Christian Coalition and begin regulating this cottage industry.

[proud2BlibKansan]

91. Missouri

Homeschoolers are NOT monitored. They aren't tested either. We have no way of knowing if they are really being educated until they 'graduate' and join the 'real world'.

[lynne]

100. VA has fairly decent rules & regs -

- for homeschooling from what I've been told - and are monitored by the School Board. Parents must follow state curriculum, must present course of study to school board for approval and children are tested by the county and must pass state required SOL tests.

But rules for extra-curricular activities are the same. Child must be enrolled in school to participate because funding for such activities is based on enrollment.

[Flavin]

122. Home schooling in Missouri - Personal Experiences.

The monitoring of H.S. in the state of Missouri is a joke.

A friend, a certified, fully disabled manic depressive was allowed to pull an A and B student from public school to be home schooled, despite the fact that the state had removed the child from her home in grade school because she was not sending the child to school in the 5th grade... she was nursing her mom. Hmmmm.....
Strike one.

There is no graduation requirement for home schoolers in Missouri.
Strike two.

Once a child reaches the age of 16, there is no state monitoring OF ANY KIND for HS students. Monitoring prior to that age is to be accomplished via the monitoring bodies of "home schooling associations", who are then 'reviewed' by the state.
Strike three.

The Homeschooling movement, once the bastion of forward thinkers, in general has been subsumed by the radical christian movements and Missouri lawmakers learned and got burned by this movement when they did try to establish a little more realistic guidelines on HSing(from the mouth of a member of the mo. senate).

This also brings up (in a friends case) that a non-custodial parent paying child support for a child, who if they simply dropped out of school would be classified as emancipated, and support would then end is determined to be HS and therefore in school... maybe. This alone should mandate strict review of HS in ALL states.

Flavin

[proud2BlibKansan]

133. I have students who were pulled out of school to be homeschooled

in MO. You are right - it is a joke. I know a family with a working single mom who homeschools her kids. Kids stay home all day alone and mom teaches them at night.

Yes, the MO legislature has attempted to pass laws regulating homeschoolers. But every time they do, the homeschoolers literally invade Jeff City with their kids and lobby the lawmakers for several days until they relent. I have been in the state capitol and witnessed this with my own eyes. The state has a designated 'education lobby' day that has been taken over by the homeschoolers. Many educators from public schools across the state no longer attend because of the huge number of homeschoolers (and their unsupervised children) camped out in lawmakers' offices.

Welcome to DU :)

[sybylla]

36. Good point! And I would expect that we would soon see

schools encouraging their strong athletic students with weak academics to homeschool so they could still participate but be exempted from academic requirement. That's just opening up a huge can of worms.

[DFWdem]

14. More discussion here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3917988&mesg_id=3917988

[redqueen]

21. Thanks! And welcome to DU!

:hi:

[davsand]

15. What is the priority for education?

Disclaimer:
My kid goes to public school, so don't jump all over me--OK?
----------------------------------------------------------------

Frankly, I think that we ask a whole lot of the public school system, and we don't give it enough credit or funding. Having said that, I also think we really need to look long and hard at our priorities for the schools. Do we care most that the kids are exposed to a wide range of things or are we more concerned that they learn to read and write and perform mathematical functions? Where is our funding going?

My kid plays softball. It isn't sponsored by the school district it is a club sport. We pay for this, we buy the uniform and my husband and I both volunteer our time as coaches. We feel it is important for her to participate in sports if she wants to.

My kid is a Brownie. It isn't sponsored by the school, we pay for that. She has fun doing it and it is a social thing. It has done a pretty good job or providing a social outlet for her and it has done wonders for teaching her about working in a group.

My kid takes private piano lessons. We pay for that too. We think music is terribly important to any kid's world. We take her to concerts, we play music for her--we make an effort to incorporate it into her world. The school has nothing to do with it.

She's signed up for dance camp later this summer along with swimming lessons. Again--at our expense. No connection to the school.

I'll stop the list here, but think about this--the reason she is doing all this stuff is because we made a commitment to her to provide this kind of stuff for her. We CHOSE to do this, just as we chose to put her in a public school where a lot of this stuff is not offered except in very broad ways.

We are NOT affluent--in fact we pretty much are non-profit at the end of the month. Our newest car is five years old, and we aren't taking a family vacation this year because we had to put in a new air conditioner this year when the 30 year old one died...

Do we REALLY need a public school to provide a basketball team for the boys and girls both? What age group should it include? Do we REALLY need a band program? A theatre program? A chorus?

I understand that it is desirable for our kids to have all these programs, but since we can't afford them for everyone, is it fair to only make it available in richer school districts?

I dunno. Maybe we need to worry more about teaching them to read and less about playing ball or marching band. I have to wonder if maybe a few of the home-schoolers are doing just that.


Laura

[BronxBoy]

68. I can see where you are coming from...

But my answer to most of your questions is Yes we do. Do we really need a Band Program, Sports Teams, Theater and a Chorus as part of a public school education? I think so

This is just my opinion, but I think a large part of the dumbing down of America can be traced to the systematic elimination of just these types of programs out of the public school system. I think an enlightened culture feeds not only the skill sets such that you say are necessary like the ability to read and count but also the arts, culture, sports and all the stuff that goes into helping a society develop well-rounded productive citizens. In most areas of NYC, music is no longer taught. Why? Athletics will always get their due because that's just the way it is. And sometimes, it's to the detriment of other activities.

But you ask some good questions. No, these activities shouldn't be offered only to rich parents but we don't have to spend 300 billion in IRAQ or tie education spending to real estate either.

[FlemingsGhost]

16. So what they want is tax-funded "daycare."

Don't churches have the activities they are looking for?

Besides, their little saviors will be with other "believers."

[LeftyMom]

81. If they wanted that, they'd send thier kids to public school

As the homeschooling parent of a almost-school-age kid I hear a whole lot of "I just want them out of the house so I can get a break" from people who want to defend thier choice to send thier offspring to instutional schools. A lot of people know public schooling generally blows and even the "good" schools are usually mediocre, but they send thier kids because it's cheaper and easier than finding an alternative.

I don't suppourt homeschoolers using public school facilities, but that argument wasn't even grounded in reality.

I don't know where you're aiming the believers crack, most homeschoolers are homeschooling for educational or social reasons, not religious ones. Keep your steroetypes to yourselves, please.

[FlemingsGhost]

114. I was commenting on the Mellinger family.

No one was trying to rattle your homeschooling cage.

Breathe.

[MaineDem]

17. I have no dog in this fight other than being a taxpayer

I never attended public schools and I have no children. The parents of homeschooled children pay the same taxes as me and as families with 17 children in the schools. I think they should be allowed to take part in publicly-funded activities. However, I also believe that athletics should be funded by those taking part regardless of in-school or home-schooled students. That doesn't make me very popular with many parents.

Granted, it seems most home-schooling parents do it for religious reasons but their taxes fund the schools as much as mine do.

Here in Maine homeschooled kids are allowed to join the public schools for sports...but it must be the district school in which they live. There was an attempt for some homeschooled kids to play sports for a Christian high school in the neighboring town. The Principals Association, which governs high school athletics, said no.

[mzmolly]

29. Exactly right! I homeschool, and I pay MUCH in property taxes

to fund the schools in my area whether or not my child takes up class space.

[proud2BlibKansan]

93. But by NOT enrolling your child in the local public school,

the district is deprived of state funding. As it has been explained upthread, school districts receive state and federal funding based on attendance. They are not paid for kids who don't come to school. So even though you pay property taxes, your decision to homeschool is costing your local school district money.

[mzmolly]

101. I still pay the same taxes regardless. Additionally, I am helping to

reduce class sizes, and further ... my child has special needs that were not being met by her school.

However, if Homeschooled children participate in school activities, they should be included in the enrollment numbers - thus increasing funding for various programs.

[proud2BlibKansan]

132. What you pay in taxes is not the point here.

Every resident pays taxes.

You can't enroll in school and pick and choose which parts you want to participate in. If you want to play football after school, then you need to be there for class all day. That is only fair.

[mzmolly]

136. Who decides what's fair? And, in some states you can "pick and choose."

As the article indicates.

[proud2BlibKansan]

141. Many districts also now charge fees

for extra curriculars. Budget crunches are real and are changing the way we provide education.

Most public school districts (and state athletic assns.) have a minimum grade average required of student athletes. So the kids who attend the school must keep their grades up to play on the football team. How fair is it to then allow non students to play on that same team? Why should the minmum GPA be only required of some of the kids? Surely you can't think that is fair.

[mzmolly]

147. I don't think that a school that has a minimum GPA can allow

kids who don't demonstrate similar competency to participate. In such cases they should have a system to gauge. As to the fees, everyone should pay a fair share.

[proud2BlibKansan]

149. Homeschoolers have vigorously campaigned

against their kids being held to the same standards as public school kids. I just don't see them accepting a system that gauges their progress, regardless of the reason.

[mzmolly]

154. I think it should only apply in cases where a minimal GPA is required

to play a sport. Most elementary schools don't have such a requirement.

[proud2BlibKansan]

155. What elementary schools have extra curricular

sports programs? I have never heard of such a thing.

[mzmolly]

157. Lots of them do.

http://www.mason.cps.k12.il.us/sports.htm

http://www.sumner.wednet.edu/studentfamilyservices/athletics/pages/Elem.html

http://www.maconaquah.k12.in.us/macel/act/ESptHome.htm

http://www.lwe.sd83.bc.ca/sports-dis/

And so on.

[proud2BlibKansan]

158. That is literally unheard of where I live

But here is an interesting item I found at the first link:

Participating students must have a current physical on file, maintain a minimum "C" average in all coursework, and be in good disciplinary standing to be eligible to participate.

So how would a homeschooled kid prove he has a "C" average? A note from his mother? :) And in good disciplinary standing? Perhaps another note from mom?

[mzmolly]

161. Well, considering I send a formal report card every quarter ... perhaps?

And, since were all so concerned about Home schooled children and their so called social skills - you'd think folks wouldn't fight allowing them participation in group activities, unless it's out of spite?

However, as I said previously ... a quick/standard test could be conducted. Where I live home schooled kids have to test every so often. Our first formal state test will be in third grade.

[proud2BlibKansan]

164. You are grading your own child

and you expect that to be accepted as authentic assessment? :) I had a kid this past year who returned to school after being homeschooled for a year. Mom told me he was working two years above grade level and even had 'test scores' to prove it. When I assessed his reading level, he was 3 years below grade level and his Math was 2 years behind his peers.

I think the state test would be the preferred method. But I don't think the kids should be tested by their own parents. And a yearly standardized test is not the same thing as a report card which also reports behavioral and social skills. But I am glad to hear testing is required in your state. In mine, there is no accountability for homeschoolers.

I also believe I mentioned the liability issue. We are not allowed to include kids not enrolled in our school on field trips or after school activities. This is a district policy which is mandated by the district's insurance carrier. So teachers are not allowed to bring their own kids on field trips. We are discouraged from even bringing them to school with us because of liability.

So there are a lot of other issues at play here, not just spite. When you reject public education, your children are not always entitled to some of the programs, regardless of what you think is right.

[mzmolly]

167. Yes I do. And as I said our state requires a periodic state test as well.

As to the insurance and other issues you note, those are all issues to be left to each state to decide.

And, for every home school horror story there is an equal story for a child educated in the public school system. Further there are amazing success stories among home schooled children as well. For example, I imagine your aware that recent national spelling bee winners were home schooled?

I personally follow the state guidelines as well as suggestions by the Core Knowledge foundation. I am confident my child is getting a great education at home.

[proud2BlibKansan]

169. Who administers the test?

[mzmolly]

171. I do.

Who administers the tests kids take in school ... the teacher. Would he/she not have an interest in skewing results? In spite of the possible desire for a teacher to help students and look good/I trust that most teachers have the actual child's interests at heart. I also trust that most home schooling parents do.

There are many philosophies in education. Some believe it's more important to be patient and look for readiness/interest then it is to look at how old a child is before teaching X, Y or Z. This is one reason home schoolers fight to remain independent. For example I have heard of a child who did not learn to read until age 10. He along with two of his brothers went to Harvard via scholarship - all were home schooled.

I think it's fine for parents to get an idea of where their children are via a state test. After all that is what schools use tests for as well. Schools have kids that do well in tests, and kids who fail. home schooling will be no different.

[proud2BlibKansan]

176. If you are doing it right,

more power to you. Unfortunately, most homeschooled kids I have known were not taught. This is in fact my strongest objection to homeschooling. I will admit that the homeschooled kids I know have returned to public schools, so the parents' efforts to educate their children at home were obviously unsuccessful. So I see few success stories. The socialization issue concerns me but I am far more worried about kids who stay at home and play video games while the parent does everything but teach. They have parents who can make their kids look great on paper, just as teachers can do for a student in a classroom. These are the parents who you need to be concerned about, just as I worry about ineffective teachers and their effect on my profession.

There is however, one major difference. Administrators and co-workers know rather quickly when a teacher is failing her students. But in my state, there is NO oversight of homeschooling families. Every time an attempt is made at the state legislative level to correct this, the homeschoolers come out in full force and lobby hard against it. For over ten years now, they have won (while their children, IMO, have lost). They have resisted any monitoring of their homeschools. They have rejected child welfare workers doing yearly checks, mandated state testing and even reports prepared by the parent and submitted to a state agency. In other words, they refuse to be held accountable. They always cite the success stories of high SAT and ACT scores and the kids who went to Harvard. But surely that is not the complete picture, any more than it would be in a public school.

And forgive me if I worry about kids who are not being educated while Mom pretends they are. I am sure it is not a majority but in my business, even one failure is too many. So until we can test kids and monitor what is happening in their homeschools, I will continue to speak out.

I do not oppose it if it is done right. A good friend of mine has homeschooled all of her 8 children. Her youngest are high school age now. And she has done a fabulous job. I have given her materials over the years and helped her locate resources. I wholeheartedly support her efforts BUT she does it right. She also has lobbied for accountability in our state and is anxious to prove that homeschooling can be done well. She and I agree that if homeschooling families are indeed as successful as they want us to believe, there is no reason for them to reject some minimal oversight and accountability. She does not see this as a threat to her independence, but rather as an opportunity to share her successes.

I am glad you support state testing. If we want to gauge the success of homeschooling, what better way than to compare these children's progress on a state test to their peers in public schools. And what a great opportunity for parents to use the tests as we do in schools, to determine needs and plan instruction accordingly. It is also a great way to prove that homeschooled kids are doing the fabulous job so many say they are.

[mzmolly]

177. I understand and respect your concerns.

Peace.

:hi:

[proud2BlibKansan]

178. Peace, mzmolly

:hi:

[ernstbass]

27. They can't have it both ways

They need to create church leagues for these children.

[Bgno64]

34. Might be good in the long run

I recently heard homeschoolers referred to as "separatists," which I think is probably pretty accurate.

What we may be missing is that there is a potential upside to this. In that many people homeschool specifically for religious reasons, by permitting their kids to participate in school district activities, those kids are going to meet other kids, and likely make friends with some of them.

Proselytizing goes both ways. And in fact, these homeschooled kids will likely wind up meeting a type of kid they wouldn't otherwise have met, might be exposed to views they might not otherwise have been exposed to.

[mzmolly]

41. I homeschool, and don't attend a church. But, I DO pay taxes for the

public school system - regardless of my child being homeschooled. I'd say the school is having it both ways. But, as a person who greatly supports public education - I don't mind paying for it.

[Carni]

53. I know a lot of normal rational people must homeschool

Unfortunately the ones who live by me are all right winged Christian whackos so it soured me to the whole concept -- which is obviously not fair on my part!

You have a good point if you are paying the taxes then why not be able to use the facilities/programs etc.

[prole_for_peace]

32. the schools in my area get funding based on attendance.

if the school near these people is funded that then their children should not get to participate if they do not attend the school. there are decisions made when children are pulled out of public school to be home schooled. they shouldn't be able to pick and choose what they want their kids to be involved in.

[The_Casual_Observer]

45. They could slow them down by charging them a fee

Then watch them run like roaches when the lights come on.

[pilgrimsoul]

38. I think the rule should be you're either all in or all out

If you reject the public school system, you should reject all of it. Public school funding, if I understand correctly, is determined at least in part by the number of students attending. So this means that every homeschooled student represents a forfeiture of funding for that school -- a choice which negatively impacts the education of every other student. Additionally, kids who attend public school, who participate every day, make a real intellectual and social contribution to everyone's educational experience. The parents who home school their kids deprive public school kids of that important benefit as well. I think parents who withdraw their kids from public schools to home school them should bear an opportunity cost because of the above-described losses that choice imposes on everyone else's kids.

With respect to sports teams, I also think it's grossly unfair to an actively contributing public school student to be denied a spot on a sports team in favor of a home schooled student who only takes from the system while giving nothing back. That is just not right. Members of a school's sports team represent that school. Who represents the school better - a kid who only shows up for practice and the big game or a kid who enriches everyone's education by fully participating as both a student and an athlete? Based on this principle, I think it's reasonable to require any student who represents a school on a sports team to be a student at that school.

[WildClarySage]

44. Seems to me that parents who homeschool are

not opting 'for' something, but are opting 'against' something. I homeschool my son, just not exclusively. He goes to public school, but we supplement what he learns in school. I believe nearly all parents 'homeschool' their kids, if not, then they ought to. To exclusively homeschool our child, though, would deprive him of too much that the schools can provide- social encounters, other adult's wisdoms and experiences, education in topics we are not the best teachers of, etc...

parents who opt against public schools don't have a right to participate in programs that public schools offer. If they are wanting the best for their kids, let them homeschool and choose public or private education.

[Ratty]

49. Homeschooling is often better than public schools

I was surprised to learn a coworker homeschools his kids. He's very liberal and non-religious, his wife stays at home. Considering the state our public schools are in I think it's a great option if you are able to do it (most families probably cannot), and are motivated to do it well. I see nothing wrong with people pulling their kids out of school because they know they can do a better job of teaching their kids themselves. Call it "thumbing your nose" if you will, it often amounts to that, but for good reason: some of our public schools are truly wretched. My sister teaches elementary school and I understand some of the reasons for this--it's generally not the teachers' fault.

Homeschoolers do pay education taxes, but so do we all, whether we have kids or not. We all benefit from an educated society, right? But when they pull their kids out of public schools, the schools lose money to the tune of something like $2000 a kid. I think if they want to take advantage of sports and extra curricular activities, they need to pay a little of that money back. Not because I am vindictive and feel like good riddance to trash, they asked for it now they have to live with it, but because it is fair and better for their children.

[mzmolly]

175. What a well reasoned post. Thanks.

It's one of the few in this thread. As a home schooler I agree with every word.

[BronxBoy]

60. I have a question.......

I don't know much about home schooling. I am a product of the NYC public school system when it was still somewhat decent. My kid went through a public school system. So I don't know much about home-schooling.

But I do know that I have read many accounts of gay kids being denied the opportunity to form clubs and support groups at their schools. I recently moved to GA and I know I read an article in the papers here somewhere a school district here in GA cancelled ALL extracurricular clubs rather than let a Gay and Lesbian Support Group start. (If there is anyone in GA who knows about this story, please post. Because I am a bad DUer and I don't remember sources)

Here is my question: A major part of the reason these people home-schooled is that they wanted their kids "to recieve an education infused with Christian priniciples". So they pulled their kids out of the public school system. Should their desires trump those wishes of parents who may have a gay kid and kept their kids in school and that child is prevented from forming an extra-curricular activity to their suiting? I'm not saying that is this issue in this case. Hell they may have 10 Gay clubs at this school. And I don't know that these parents are gay-haters.

But I think if you are going to bring up the fact that you are a tax-payer and your child is entitled to certain services, then it should apply to all children, especially those who choose to stick with the public school system.

But I'm looking to be educated here

[HockeyMom]

61. Don't agree with this

Both my daughters played on HS sports teams. First of all, are we talking about intra-murals or Varsity teams? Just about anybody can play on intramural. If these kids are trying for spots on a Varsity team, that means they are keeping off from the team a kid who goes to the public school. Apart from that fact, what about insurance? They have to attend all the practices for insurance proposes. What about SCHOOL SPIRIT? What do home school kids care about Public School Spirit?

The private/parochial schools have their own sports teams. They cannot play on or AGAINST a public school teams. If these home school kids/PARENTS want them to play sports, let them form their own teams and play against each other.

As far as the other clubs, will they be demanding an end to Science Clubs (CREATION CLUBS?), demanding an end to Gay/Straight Alliance Clubs, etc? Sorry, homeschool parents you cannot have to cake and eat it too.

I say keep them OUT.

[union_maid]

69. If I'd had to homeschool, I'd have tried to move

My kids are grown up. I might have some regrets, but sending them to public school is not among them. School is a lot more than classes. A teacher is more than someone who's received education in a subject or subjects, although how parents can aquire a real depth of knowledge in all the subjects that are covered in school is beyond me anyway.

I know people have their reasons for homeschooling. Some people have very bad schools to deal with. I do think that those kids are missing things, though. Learning to deal with difficult kids and teachers that you don't like is part of growing up, too.

My kids are both in careers they love, chosen because of their particular talents which were discovered by teachers. Although we have plenty of people in our family who are as educated as any teacher, and one who was a teacher when our kids were young, we didn't have anyone expert enough in design to discover that my daughter had a lot of potential in that area. She's been a graphic designer for 15 years and is now able to work, make money and stay home with her own daughter all at the same time. She might have done the same thing if she was homeschooled, but the way events unfolded, I'm inclined to doubt it. It didn't "show" in the way that a talent for drawing or painting might.

Even with musicians in the family background, it never would have occured to me to put a violin in the hands of my 8 year old, rough and tumble son. In fact, I resisted the idea when the music teacher suggested it. I figured he'd use it as a baseball bat. I finally gave in and it turned out to the most important thing in his life.

My granddaughter just finished elementary school. Her start in public education was not auspicious. When she started kindergarten she cried every morning and tried not to go if at all possible. This year she won the academic awards, participates in sports and other school activities including "kindergarten helpers" in which older kids help kindergarteners adjust to school. If you asked her in kindergarten or going into first grade if she wanted to be schooled at home her answer would have been "Yes!!" Now, she loves school.

There can be reason for homeschooling, but I think our priorities ought to be providing good public education for every kid, in every neighborhood in the country.

[HockeyMom]

74. I went to parochial school and sent my kids to a good public school

in the suburbs. After what I went through, I would never send them to parochial school - all the praying. Academically I would say, they were comparable. As far as home schooling, I have an Associate's Degree and I am a TA. I do NOT FEEL QUALIFIED to teach. I cannot see how some parents can presume that they are more qualified to teach with a just a High School Diploma over a person who has a Master's Degree and state certification.

[proud2BlibKansan]

94. Thank you for saying this

I sometimes want to ask homeschooling parents if they would ever consider abandoning their child's doctor and taking care of their health needs at home. Of course they wouldn't. Teachers are also highly trained professionals. I have never understood why some parents think just anyone can do what it took me 7+ years of schooling and years of experience to master.

And yet, even with the professional abilities I have, I would never consider homeschooling my kids. The main reason is lack of socialization. Sorry, homeschoolers, but a field trip every couple weeks with other kids is NOT the same thing as working alongside peers in a learning community every day. But another reason is that I know from experience (and most of my colleagues agree) that a parent is not always a child's best teacher. When one of my own kids needed extra help with school work, I hired a tutor.

[LibDemAlways]

72. Parents who homeschool in my Southern

California district are permitted to enroll their kids in elective courses and PE. Here most of the homeschooled kids are in the acting business. We don't get the fundie types, and the district has a flexible "home school" program with a full-time coordinator. They even accept kids from outside the district.

[Blue_Tires]

73. there aren't any local rec leagues they could join?? n/t

[GoddessOfGuinness]

80. Link to excellent article...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=251&topic_id=213&mesg_id=213

[union_maid]

84. from that article...

"Charter school for homeschoolers". Isn't that kind of an oxymoron?

[GoddessOfGuinness]

86. Not necessarily...

My older boy was enrolled in a homeschool program this last year which was held in a school. The kids had a well-equipped study area and worked on their own for the most part; so those who lacked self-motivation did not thrive in the environment.

At the same time, it offered opportunities for the students to work together on projects, tutor and mentor each other. Supervisors helped students find ways to apply the skills they were learning to their individual areas of interest.

The director of the school had all kinds of resources to offer the kids apprenticeship and work/study opportunities.

[Blasphemer]

85. Too much focus is put on tax contributions...

The bigger issue is that students who fully attend the school, fully contribute to the school community. These contributions are not limited to afterschool or "extracurricular" time. For example, in elementary school, I tutored younger students as an academic elective for about 45 minutes of my school day. Artistically inclined students painted murals. There are plays still performed in my elementary school that were written by students 15 - 20 years ago. During classroom learning time, children learn from each other. It's part of the learning process. It's what makes the school a learning community. Children who contribute nothing to the academic learning community shouldn't benefit from the extracurricular activities that the fully enrolled students benefit from. Where do you draw the line? If a particular teacher has an outstanding reputation, parents might decide that they want their homeschooled kids to only attend a class taught by that particular teacher. Again, taking selectively from the system while giving back nothing. I think it's an all or nothing proposition. Parents can choose public school, private school, or homeschooling but unlimited access to public school activities shouldn't be part of the deal. As has been mentioned above, it's underpriveleged children that always end up suffering the most. Some parents are just not in a position to homeschool their children even if they question the public school system. It's very unfair for their children to lose spots or have their activities diluted by students who aren't making an equal contribution to the school. Not to mention the contribution by parents and teachers who use their own money when school funding doesn't fully provide for the kids. I don't have kids (and probably never will) but I went to public school (given my family's financial situation, there WERE no other options) and was fortunate to get a good education but much of that was due to parents and teachers who went above and beyond what is generally expected. I worry about kids like me who have limited options and resources getting the raw end of the deal. I realize the bigger issue is the failure of our governments to create adequate public education for all of our kids but in the absence of a radical restructuring of our priorities, and dealing with this specific issue, it's hard not to view it as thoroughly unfair.

[proud2BlibKansan]

95. A point that is rarely brought up in these discussions:

The ability to get along well with others is more important in the work place than a GPA. So if parents want to raise kids who become successful adults, they are better off enrolled in a school than isolated at home. The learning experiences kids have at school in working with peers and being a part of a learning community are probably the most important part of school.

[mzmolly]

109. Who is isolating their homeschooled child?

This is a myth.

Many children are teased and bullied in school, what is that teaching them? Is that not isolation in the worst sense? Schoold children learn that "different" people are to be ridiculed and excluded. They learn that it's ok to abuse people who are smaller/weaker/sensitive or standout.

Many home schooled children participate in a VARIETY of activities that lend to "getting along with others." Additionally, parents are involved so kids are not bullying one another. Many HS kids also have siblings and are learning to get along with their peers in that regard.

In school kids when kids do socialize they are often told not to talk because the teacher is "teaching." And, many schools are eliminating recess because they are trying to keep up with the so called NCLB standards in order NOT to lose funding.

Let's focus on the real issues surrounding public education, and stop scapegoating homeschooled kids please.

[proud2BlibKansan]

138. Homeschooling is NOT and never will be the same kind of

socializing experiences that are provided in a classroom daily. In school, children learn to work together in a community of learners. That is impossible to duplicate at home.

Dealing with a bully teaches a child how NOT to treat others and how to solve problems. And since both of my own children went through 13+ years of schooling and encountered only one bully, I think that is a ridiculous reason to avoid public school. What will that child do when he grows up and meets a bully in the workplace or in his neighborhood? What skills would he have to deal with this bully if he has never had an opportunity to be a member of a large group that dealt with a bully? Do you think an employer will allow any employee to just stay at home and work because they can't work in a group?

Children are taught to listen respectfully and follow directions in a classroom. Just like in the adult world, no one has the right to be the center of attention whenever they feel like it. Kids are given plenty of opportunities to talk to their peers while working together in that community of learners. They also may interact and converse at lunch. And I keep hearing of all these school eliminating recess, yet I personally know of NONE. I live in a large metro area and I teach in a district with 50 elementary schools. None have stopped recess.

[really annoyed]

159. Leave Homeschoolers Alone!

Parents have EVERY right to homeschool their children, regardless of their reasons. It is legal in all 50 states.

Study after study has shown homeschoolers to score higher on ACT's and SAT's and to have BETTER socialization skills than public school kids. The results are especially startling for African-American children, who outperform their public school peers - who happen to be failing at every level. Not only that, the majority of homeschoolers get into the college of their choice, and usually start college course work way before public school kids.

Get off your soapbox and stop telling people how to raise their children. Homeschooling gives parents the right to install their moral and educational values to their children. I think that is why the majority of so-called "liberals" are so against it.

Here are the stats...

The U.S. Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics reported the following reasons for families who chose home-schooling: 31 percent cited the negative social environment of public schools, 30 percent said they wanted to provide religious or moral instruction, 16 percent said they were dissatisfied with the academic instruction of public schools, 9 percent wanted more family time, 7 percent said their child had a physical or mental health problem, and 7 percent said their child had other special needs.

[ulysses]

162. would that we could.

Parents have EVERY right to homeschool their children, regardless of their reasons.

So they do. Want to homeschool your kid? Knock yourself out. I may think that most folks aren't particularly qualified, but that's me. I'm not interested in codifying that opinion.

I'd be interested to know, though, why those who want to keep their kids out of the "negative social environment of public schools" then want to have them participate in extracurricular activities within those same schools. It's the same environment.

[proud2BlibKansan]

165. If homeschoolers want to be left alone,

then they should stop making demands like their kids have a right to be involved in extra curricular activities.

[mzmolly]

160. Your right. A home-schooled child won't be bullied, feel compelled

to "fit in," be subject to as much "peer pressure" etc.

Dealing with a bully teaches a child how NOT to treat others and how to solve problems.

What garbage. I never thought I'd hear "The Plus Side Of Bullying" here for goodness sakes.

Here is food for thought on that matter:

As an educator you should "educate" yourself on this - as it's a serious matter:

The damage from bullying doesn't stop after graduation. According to Dr. William Coleman, professor of pediatrics at the University of North Carolina School of Medicine, bullies are four times as likely as the average child to have engaged in criminal behavior by age 24; they also grow up deficient in social, coping and negotiating skills and are more likely to engage in substance abuse. Victims have similar problems; they also have fewer friends and are more likely to be depressed.

Since most bullying takes place furtively--in hallways, bathrooms, the back of the school bus--teachers have a hard time controlling it.

http://specialed.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0%2C9171%2C1047497%2C00.html

And since both of my own children went through 13+ years of schooling and encountered only one bully, I think that is a ridiculous reason to avoid public school.

Who here said they were avoiding school because of this? It's simply another reason to appreciate homeschooling. I am glad your kids were fortunate enough to rarely experience bullies, how on earth did they learn to survive without the benefits of bullying?

What will that child do when he grows up and meets a bully in the workplace or in his neighborhood?

The same thing your kids would do I imagine? Generally bullies in the workplace are fired, and in the neighborhood they're arrested.

What skills would he have to deal with this bully if he has never had an opportunity to be a member of a large group that dealt with a bully?

LOL, what a ridiculous notion. I have never been bullied in the workplace, but I have been on both ends at school. People are not allowed to beat you up at work, nor are they allowed to tease, call names, steal lunch money, etc. :eyes:

Do you think an employer will allow any employee to just stay at home and work because they can't work in a group?

So, Home-schooled kids can't work in groups now? That statement merits another one of these ... :eyes:

Children are taught to listen respectfully and follow directions in a classroom. Just like in the adult world, no one has the right to be the center of attention whenever they feel like it.

Ah, so you insinuate that that home schooled children are not taught to listen respectfully and follow directions at home? Just like the adult world, my child is exposed to people of many ages and she is able to follow directions. Imagine that!?

Kids are given plenty of opportunities to talk to their peers while working together in that community of learners.

WOW, "community of learners" what a nice ring that has to it. And I respect your right to choose to involve your child in a public school setting. However I appreciate that I am able to tailor my child's education to my child without the added distractions that were troubling for her in a public school setting. I feel that's beneficial for her in the short and long run personally. I am also able to answer questions for her at any time, we are able to work on things of interest longer, and/or tackle any problem areas for as long as we need, all things that are valuable when it comes to teaching.

They also may interact and converse at lunch.

My child gets to interact with her friends all summer, after school, and on organized outings with other home-schooled kids - and we generally have longer then 30 minutes to do so.

And I keep hearing of all these school eliminating recess, yet I personally know of NONE. I live in a large metro area and I teach in a district with 50 elementary schools. None have stopped recess.

Well, you have now. ~ Google it.

http://www.mnip-net.org/ddlead.nsf/0/8a58ae48873aa16285256d3e001181f1?OpenDocument

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/saturdayspin/192344_cashman25.html

http://www.mikespe.com/physedexpress/index.php/weblog/more/recess_a_dying_trend_in_us_schools/

I resent the un-informed insults to the many children/parents that choose to home school.

As you are an educator, you may appreciate an alternative view from one of your peers:

A former New York teacher of the year, Gatto is the most interesting writer on education today. He shows that our bureaucratic schools and our bureaucratic society get in the way of learning, and he often contrasts modern America with 19th century America, where family, work, and democratic self-government let people educate themselves.

http://www.preservenet.com/theory/Gatto.html

[proud2BlibKansan]

166. Well if bullying is such a concern

then why are homeschoolers asking to be included in extra curricular activities? Do they think there are no bullies on the football team?

I tell you what - as soon as the homeschoolers stop these attacks on public education, then we teachers will stop defending the institution.

Deal?

[mzmolly]

168. Extra curricular activities are supervised by many parents for one.

And, sports are elective, so bullying is not tolerated generally. However, in a school setting teachers have to allow kids to participate. And, I don't blame *teachers* because bully's exist. I realize there are challenges that are beyond the control of the PS system. But, I don't care for the insinuation that Home schooled children are being cheated on a mass level, as it is simply false. It is also false to say that public school children are being cheated as Public School works beautifully for many if not most.

Also, I don't feel I've attacked public school, I have simply said that it didn't work for my child.

I am a HUGE supporter of Public Education, and I attempted it with my own child. I just refuse to ridicule parents for making the best choice for their families, no matter what that particular choice is.

[mzmolly]

108. Your claims are quite faulty.

Again, taking selectively from the system while giving back nothing.

"Nothing?" Who's to say that Home schooled families are not "giving" to their schools? As others have indicated ~ we fund the public schools and GET NOTHING.

I think it's an all or nothing proposition. Parents can choose public school, private school, or homeschooling but unlimited access to public school activities shouldn't be part of the deal.

If it's all or nothing, I should be exempt from contributing financially to the schools in my area. Though frankly I am a supporter of public education so I would not want to see the "all or nothing" thing happen.

As has been mentioned above, it's underpriveleged children that always end up suffering the most. Some parents are just not in a position to homeschool their children even if they question the public school system. It's very unfair for their children to lose spots or have their activities diluted by students who aren't making an equal contribution to the school.

Public schooled children should always have first priority. No one is suggesting that any child fully enrolled should lose their slot to a home schooled child.

Not to mention the contribution by parents and teachers who use their own money when school funding doesn't fully provide for the kids. I don't have kids (and probably never will) but I went to public school (given my family's financial situation, there WERE no other options) and was fortunate to get a good education but much of that was due to parents and teachers who went above and beyond what is generally expected.

Who's to say homeschooling parents would not and do not contribute their own time/money?

I worry about kids like me who have limited options and resources getting the raw end of the deal. I realize the bigger issue is the failure of our governments to create adequate public education for all of our kids but in the absence of a radical restructuring of our priorities, and dealing with this specific issue, it's hard not to view it as thoroughly unfair.

As a child who grew up in poverty, I fail to see your point. If we want to strengthen schools for poor children we need to fight for an equitable school system ... like Dean provided in Vermont. In his state he leveled out school funds in all districts, regardless of income in the surrounding area. Where I live now taxes are close to 2000. annually, in a near by city where my family lives, taxes are about 500. Public education needs to be funded equally in all areas, in every state. THAT is how you solve the problem of lesser quality education for poor students. Additionally, if Home schooled children participate in classes/activities it should increase state funding via enrollment numbers.

[cap]

99. I've never heard of a home school parent admitting failure

that they just couldnt teach a subject well enough. Most home school parents will teach their version of American History, ethics and civics and not permit dissenting views.

[mzmolly]

103. Do you hear many teachers talk of THEIR failures?

Do they promote dissenting views?

My child would have learned what was in her curriculum in school, nothing more. At home we DO discuss differing views. Further all teachers have strengths and weaknesses.

[ulysses]

105. as a taxpayer, I help fund the military, even though

I'm not in the armed services. I don't expect the Air Force to let me come to Dobbins and play with their jets, or go down to East Point and take a tank out for a spin.

This is silly.

[mzmolly]

106. I think your comparison is "silly" frankly.

eom

[ulysses]

107. why?

Isn't it essentially the same argument? I made a conscious decision years ago to not join the military, just as homeschooling parents make a decision to not send their kids to public schools. That's all fine and good, but those parents demanding to be allowed to use public school facilities and attend extracurricular activities is like me demanding to be taken on maneuvers with the Third Army.

[mzmolly]

110. No it's not the same argument.

I make the bold suggestion that flying a fighter jet is vastly different then playing a local game of soccer.

[ulysses]

112. but the homeschoolers' point, as I understand it,

is not one of difficulty, but one of access to taxpayer-funded facilities and activities.

[mzmolly]

113. Your point is that playing soccer is akin to flying a fighter jet.

I disagree.

You are able to use the parks in your area because you pay for them, you use community centers as you pay for them ... I suggest this is a more apt comparison.

[ulysses]

115. that's quite untrue.

Please point out where I've said that playing soccer is akin to flying a fighter jet beyond the fact that a USAF jet and a school soccer team are both taxpayer funded. :)

[mzmolly]

118. You likened using military equipment and flying military planes to

kids playing sports at the local elementary school.

[ulysses]

143. to the extent that they're both funded with tax money, yes.

No further than that.

[Ratty]

116. That's a great argument

I think it's very similar to the homeschooling issue. When I worked in a public library someone told me about a patron who insisted they could use our phones and our office supplies because we were a public institution funded by their tax dollars and that phone and those office supplies were funded by those same dollars. Public use of these types of facilities is not unlimited, you have to play by the rules. The same applies to public schools, just because you pay property taxes doesn't entitle you use the facilities in any way you see fit. There are rules, such as formally enrolling your children and seeing that the school gets state money for that enrollment.

We pay taxes for a lot of things that make our society a better place, whether we directly use the services those tax dollars pay for or not. I'm gay and single, I have no children, but I'm happy to pay my property taxes for public education--I don't expect to be able to waltz onto the local elementary school and sit in on classes and participate in arts and crafts and play in the basketball team or join any of the clubs.

If homeschoolers want to use public school facilities then they should make some economic arrangements, pay for that access. What we have with these whiners is a bunch of self-righteous tightwads just like my obnosxious library patron.

[mzmolly]

119. I don't think any home schooler should object to making "economic

arrangements." I feel they do when they pay taxes.

That said, states that have rules allowing home schooled children to participate in classes/activities should also increase funding based upon class size/demand. Or, they should allow for a "paid" enrollment program.

However, I don't see that your library comparison is any more related than the fighter jet straw-man above. Unless the library denied access to home schooled children while allowing access to publicly schooled children, that is.

[Ratty]

130. Ha, it's not a "straw man" argument because you don't agree with it

I don't think any home schooler should object to making "economic arrangements." I feel they do when they pay taxes.

So I should be allowed to go to the local elementary school, check out books from the library, use the photocopier, etc. I've made "economic arrangements" by paying my property taxes.

Unless the library denied access to home schooled children while allowing access to publicly schooled children, that is.

The public school can deny access to me as an adult but not to children? In fact I should have MORE access to their resources because I pay property taxes and don't even send a kid to school. It's really not a "straw man" argument, believe it or not. It's about how public resources are intended to be used. Taxes pay for libraries and libraries are intended to make books available for checkout to patrons with a library card. Libraries wouldn't work otherwise. Taxes pay for schools and schools are intended to accomodate registered students. If your nephew comes and visits for three weeks you can't just ship him off to the local public school while he's in town unless you first register him. You can't even let him play on their sports teams or participate in their clubs whether he is homeschooled or not.

[mzmolly]

134. It is a strawman. Your argument makes a ridiculous comparison, as did

the suggestion that using military equipment is akin to kids playing soccer.

The public school can deny access to me as an adult but not to children? In fact I should have MORE access to their resources because I pay property taxes and don't even send a kid to school. It's really not a "straw man" argument, believe it or not. It's about how public resources are intended to be used. Taxes pay for libraries and libraries are intended to make books available for checkout to patrons with a library card. Libraries wouldn't work otherwise. Taxes pay for schools and schools are intended to accomodate registered students. If your nephew comes and visits for three weeks you can't just ship him off to the local public school while he's in town unless you first register him. You can't even let him play on their sports teams or participate in their clubs whether he is homeschooled or not.

Who said homeschooled kids shouldn't register for classes/sports in which they partake? And, the goal of schools is to educate children, that goal is not threatened by allowing homeschooled kids to partake in specific events/classes/sports activities. Additionally, my school district allows my homeschooled child to use the school library under my supervision.

[Ratty]

137. It's not "ridiculous" just because you say so.

It's a perfectly valid comparison.

Additionally, my school district allows my homeschooled child to use the school library under my supervision

Good for your school! I have no objection to schools making special accomodations such as that. In fact I'm all for it as I tried to convey in an earlier post. I object to people who seem to think that because they pay taxes they are automatically entitled to such accomodations at no charge. Nope, doesn't work like that. My "ridiculous" comparisons made exactly that point.

[mzmolly]

139. But, it's not at no charge. I'm charged the same as every other parent in

the area.

I don't think your library customer made a reasonable request, I do think it's reasonable to allow homeschooled kids to participate in classes/sports.

:hi:

[redqueen]

135. But that use is not available to you, unless you enlist and are accepted.

If the funds are paid out based on participation, and not enrollment, I have no problem with this, simply because the students who are eligible deserve that enrichment if they can't get it elsewhere.

[ulysses]

146. that's exactly my point.

As to the rest, I'd like to know what happens on field trips, when the homeschoolers don't have the same set of background knowledge that the public class has...or, even better, if I take a science class to the Fernbank museum for a dinosaur exhibit, does a fundie homeschool group demand equal time for an "intelligent design" field trip?

[redqueen]

151. Well I was reading this more as about extracurricular activities...

band, sports, etc. However apparently there are districts allowing home-schooled students to join certain classes... I'm not sure how field trips would be an issue unless they were in one of those partial-use systems which allowed them to attend certain classes. And of course in those cases, they'd be up to speed with their classmates.

As far as the groups of fundie home-schoolers... I wouldn't anticipate that they'd be allowed to change the curriculum - however much they may want to, seeing as how they're already home-schooled.

[ulysses]

163. ok, then - sports.

Prayer before a football game. Etc.

I wouldn't anticipate that they'd be allowed to change the curriculum - however much they may want to, seeing as how they're already home-schooled.

Give it time. They may be home schooled, but if they're participating in public school activities, don't they have a right to help determine what those activities are? That argument *will* be made, eventually.

[demo dutch]

120. This is absolute Bullshit! They should get their athletic, music and other

other extra curriculum activities at their Christian Schools, Churches etc., if the public system isn't "christian" enough for them!

I pay all kinds of taxes for things I disagree with, like this war!

[Bridget Burke]

125. Not all the homeschoolers are "Christians"

But many of the "groovy" ones still think the regular kids are inferior.

Schoold children learn that "different" people are to be ridiculed and excluded. They learn that it's ok to abuse people who are smaller/weaker/sensitive or standout.

Why would they want to expose their kids to the abusive products of our public school system?

[ckramer]

129. I propose one revolutionary solution to this

Teach according to the kid's ability to learn, abolish the concept of "grade level" - don't aritficially set up grade restriction. Treat individual student individually. If a 8 year old can do 12 grade's stuff, let him. Or vice versa. Let student take whatever grade level class they want. Once they pass the comprehensive grade level final exam, acknowledge it officially in the transcript.

That involves reforming our current 'assembly line' education system.

Once that's done, much of the home schooling would become unnecessary if religion wasn't the first reason for home schooling.

[CarlWoodward]

140. I don't

I don't have a beef, really, with homeschooling. This issue just seems very simple to me - sports teams and school clubs are activities for students enrolled in the school. Period. If you're not enrolled, there are other alternatives, like community sports teams, YMCA, etc. I'm sure the homeschooling movement could very effectively create its own teams and leagues of homeschooled kids, if they wanted.

I was educated in the Catholic schools in St. Louis. We had our own teams. I couldn't just go to the nearby public school and demand to play on one of their teams while a student at a private school - I would have been laughed out of the building.

This notion that somehow the school has any kind of obligation to non-students is ridiculous. Sure, the parents pay taxes, but then so do lots of people who don't have kids in the school. If that was the case, my 65-year-old father could go to the local public school in his town and demand use of the gym and workout facilities, because he pays school taxes.

What really rubs people the wrong way about this whole issue, I think, is that for several years the most vocal members of the homeschooling movement have demonized public schools, calling them immoral, corrupt, ineffective, crime-ridden and godless. Now, suddenly they want their kid on the school's football team. Does that sound like hypocrisy? Sure does to me.

[PATRICK]

174. It had to be about sports

predictable exceptions to the principles of home schooling and those nasty public schools.

What hypocrites. I am sure Johnny really wants to get on the chess club.

Make them fund their own private teams or apply to a private school team.

The school system is already forced to lend material support to these rugged educationalists to sustain their myth. They probably want the right to come in and join prayer circles in the public school too, so long as they are not contaminated by secular non-sports interaction.

When these kids graduate from home will they head for the hills?