Obama Bans Home Schooling

I don't agree with home schooling. The kids need to be socialized. You'll learn more about how to deal with other people.

It's one of the reasons I didn't do it, Bill, but many home schooled kids do have a lot of socialization through a network of other home schooled kids that get together for play groups and such. I did prefer that my child have the opportunity to interact in a school setting with sports and other activities. It's still something that I think should never be taken away as long as they are being educated well. Personally, I don't see that most parents have the qualifications to teach because I just don't think they did so well in school themselves from what I see here alone, but the children do seem to fare well on nationalized tests from any of the stats I've seen. I can't figure out how, but they do.

I would never want a child socialized in HISD. "Houston Independent School District"

AMEN to that!

Home schooling does not prepare the young for the work place, where they must get along with people of all walks of life.

Leo's exactly right. In business it's just partly about what you know, and more about how you interact with people you do business with: being able to read them, beyond the words, and establish trust. Most business results from the subtleties beneath the surface of the social interaction.

Home schooling does not prepare the young for the work place, where they must get along with people of all walks of life.

Having attended public schools, I can say with 100% certainty that they did not prepare me for any situation beyond reading, writing and arithmetic. My real education started when I left school. From what I gather, public schools today fail to teach kids to read, write and do the arithmetic. Enter home schooling. It's origin is based on the lack of education public schools are providing. If that isn't the case, then home schooling should die a natural death, but it seems to be growing more popular instead. Hence it is now a major political issue.

I doubt that would fly. Wings would be clipped real fast.

It's all according to the quality of the teaching: I've known homeschooled kids who are absolutely brilliant, because their parents were brilliant and focused, and kids that are dumber than rocks because their parents wouldn't know their posteriors from their elbows.

What they all have in common, however, and I agree with Bill, is that they need to have contact with their age group peers, especially the ones who are not home schooled. If they don't have those relationships to "normalize" them socially, they have a tendency (from what I've seen) to go wild once they're out of the grasp of their parents.

That's one of the biggest misconceptions it that they don't have contact with their age group and peers. The ones I know bring their children together for those activities, and share teaching skills and unique talents for everyone.

They read the classics and are allowed to give an answer that is only accepted from a textbook - an answer with logic behind it.

I deal with these children personally, so I'm speaking from my experience.

Your results may vary.

Linda, you're right, they do, as I said above. It's not as if they're not socialized, but I think it's a choice parents need to make with careful thought because there are many considerations.

I actually home schooled my own child for about a month or so when I first bought our home and he was 10 and in the 5th grade. He had spent all his years from kindergarten on in the school in the district from where we moved. We had come from a neighborhood full of kids to a remote area with no one for him to play with. He missed all his friends, and I was too intense and demanding, so he was very unhappy. I was able to arrange to get him back into that school district claiming I needed after school daycare in that area, so although I had to drive him in the AM, he got to ride the bus with his friends back to our old neighborhood, and one of the mothers of his friends offered to have him stay with her until I came to get him later in the day. It was the best decision for us.

Home schooling does not allow for indoctrination.

Now, that's the best reason to home school I've ever read here today.

That's ridiculous AC;

It just means that the indoctrination comes from the parents.

"It just means that the indoctrination comes from the parents."

Isn't that where it SHOULD come from? It's called parenting instead of promoting a nanny state.

All indoctrination isn't promoting any kind of state.

Take your buddy Linda: she'd tell her children that people of different races shouldn't marry. I think it probably has to do with her idea of white people being superior to other races.

I'm sure she indoctrinated her children with those beliefs.

"...she'd tell her children...."

That's her right. She's entitled to her own beliefs, just as you are to yours.

AC W. Sep 28, 2009, 4:31pm EDT
Home schooling does not allow for indoctrination.




Cheer! well said. Could you imagine having a child turn out like Ali Hussein Lopez?

Scott;

It's pretty apparent that you weren't schooled at all, but why don't you just pray for enlightenment?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

AC;

It's still indoctrination. Thanks for proving my point.

"...why don't you just pray for enlightenment?"

He'd be more likely to get it that way than he would from the government.

"It's still indoctrination."

I'm not denying that indoctrination occurs, but I would rather it be from parenting than from the state.

Thanks for admitting that I'm right on this one AC. Indoctrination is indoctrination.

As for Scott, nice boy. Great "Christian" attitude.

Let's be clear. I agree that indoctrination occurs, but I DO NOT AGREE that indoctrination is indoctrination. Such a statement makes all indoctrination equal, and it most certainly is not.

I've met and know lots of home schooled kids and they are among the brightest, most social young people I know. They know what THEY want to do, where THEY want to go, and do not think their ONLY choice is to go to school, get a good education, and then go to work for someone else and pay your dues to the govt. like good little soldiers.

they are taught to think for themselves, not follow others. THEW will be our next leaders who we will be able to count on.

I encourage it every chance I get and see more an more people doing it every day!

It's beastly difficult to do "right," but I absolutely believe it should be an option.

Cheap political shots don't advance the discussion.

We're both holders of advanced degrees, we have an extensive library of the classics, and my wife is the former head of a HS English department. But we didn't home school our sons. They are adopted and have brain damage. Every case is different.

Our neighbors are well-educated; he's a physicist at Fermi National Accelerator Lab; she knows what an "artistic director" is (all I really want to know); their son has had home-schooling, private academy experience (at which he was socially ostracized, leading to a withdrawal of his participation there) and is now mainlined at the same HS that our guys attend. Parental love and care are more important than anything else.

Yes, Dave, it should always be an option, and I hope it always will be.

I have to agrre that the OPTION should be allowed. My sis home-schooled all 6 of her children, getting together with other home-schooled children and parents on a regular schedule. All 6 got to go to High School for Senior year, and all 6 have gone on to college and or started viable businesses. I home-schooled my child for 4 years because she stayed in trouble in regular schools.

Surely Dave, I accept your view that home schooling should be an option and not to be under a compulsion. Needless to say, parents should explore all ways and means to see that children do not lag behind in any activity besides studies. To attract diversity even in the activities of children is also one method of allowing channels for diversified nation. Children have a greater responsibility towards the society and it is they who would have to shoulder responsibilities of the country for which they need to be trained in every possible way. I feel your option button should say everything about home schooling.

Thanks, penni and Vinod. No doubt a healthy dose of "home schooling" is needed in every case--showing the kid that school is important by asking them about their studies, helping out when needed, encouraging participation in optional activities such as music programs, and getting to know the teachers and keeping the whole email communication process going (the preferred method of communication among teachers at our school).

Thanks, Suze, for sponsoring a very interesting thread. Love your "performance art" up there at the top!

Sometimes people prefer to just have a question thrown out rather than have to read someone's perspective, I suppose, and I was surprised at the response, but it was fun to read everyone's take on it. Thank you for your contributions. (Yes, of course the artwork was necessary for the effectiveness of the title's hook.) :)

When my daughter was four, I asked her if she would like to learn how to read. She said sure, so I taught her how. I still have the actual piece of paper I wrote on that day, to show her how the letters stood for sounds we make when we talk.

She was reading simple sentences within a few weeks, and children's books within a few months. No exercises, no structured lessons, no scheduled anything. When I took her to the first day of kindergarten, I tried to tell the teacher (whom I knew from working at the school) that she could read, cause I was afraid she'd get bored sitting there for months on end, while stuff that had no value to her whatsoever was being taught. I thought maybe the teacher could quietly slip her a book or something, to keep her from going nuts, but the teacher just didn't believe me, said something like; "Oh, you mean she recognizes her name?" . . There were many people there, and I couldn't get her to understand that I meant she could just plain read.

Near the very end of the school year, that teacher came out a bit early, to where I was waiting for school to get out, as usual. She brought Alyssa, and a book, and asked her to read. Alyssa casually read from what was not even a childeren's book, and the teacher apologized, saying she never realized Alyssa was just sitting there all that time, not wanting to bother anyone. She told me there was going to be no way for the teachers to accommodate my daughter realistically speaking, at least till the third grade, when the "gifted and talented" program became an option.

I spoke to the principle, and the district superintendent (who I also knew fairly well), and I just continued to take Alyssa out of school early, so as to have some time before I went to work, and dropped her off at mom's, to continue with informal homeschooling. This allowed her to have lunch and all but the last brief recess, to hang out with her friends and stuff.

I never pushed her in any way, and we didn't even work on "school" sorts of things on a regular basis. When they tested for the "GATE" program (near the end of the second grade), Alyssa read at a high school graduate level, and did math at a ninth grade level. I "accidentally" educated my daughter pretty much as far as "public school" takes kids.

My "partial home schooling" ended there, and Alyssa graduated high school modestly above average in reading and math. Needless to say, I think the way we do this mass educating, is remarkably stupid, and unnatural.

That is a very sad commentary on our schools, John. I also taught my son to read before he entered school, but it was much different from our short home-schooling experience I described above. He was the one who wanted to learn to read because his cousin who was a couple of years older with whom he was close had learned to read in first grade, and he was actually crying one day because she could read and he couldn't. I told him we could solve that problem very easily, and we did. It was a much more relaxed experience than the home schooling experience though.

Kind of a funny story...My brother just had a late in life baby with his second wife, a beautiful little girl, and Auntie Suze is enjoying her as much as they are, I think. I just baby sat for them tonight, and she is so much fun. I saw these cards on their coffee table with words on them, and asked what they were for. They're teaching her to read, but she's just barely five months old! I think they're nuts. I wouldn't mind so much if the words had pictures associated with them, but they don't. When my son was very young, I had picture books with stories, and when he was her age I wouldn't read the stories, but just point to the pictures and name the objects. By the time he was 7 months old, I could ask him where each of the objects was and he would point to them. I also did that with the various pictures we had on the walls. I think that's part of why he talked so early, but I think this word association with no pictures is very confusing. I haven't said anything, though. It's their baby, and I won't say a word. (I hope)

Sue,

" . . cards on their coffee table with words on them . . "

Oh crap, that's "sight reading" bullshit. That's what I found out the schools in Cal. had been boondoggled into adopting (soon after abandoned), which freaked me out . . . that's why I asked Alyssa if she would like to learn to read. The idea is so dumb, reading without phonic import, that I simply could not allow my limited time with her to pass, without making some effort to preempt that goofball method. I didn't want her to grow up illiterate, for godsake.

(Warn them gently, if you can)

Yeah, sight reading, that's exactly what they said, and my brother started to go into detail, but I changed the subject. I found this. Maybe I'll print it out and leave it on the coffee table?

By the way, thank you very much!

California always seems to be the pilot program for these 'innovations.' This whole topic brought back memories of an early childhood learning class about the open classrom I had in college. This was in the early 70s and CA was one of the only states to employ it at that time. Theoretically, I thought it was fabulous to have these kids in grade combined learning appropriate groups so bright kids wouldn't be bored, etc. My son's school, in the 80s was one of these. He loved it and thrived there, but it was not at all in practice what it was supposed to have been. The walls were open between two grades, and kids sat at round tables instead of desks, but in practicality that was the beginning and the end of the concept as far as I could see it.

When my son was in the 3rd or 4th grade, they implemented a program where parents could volunteer to help with kids who had fallen behind in various subjects due to absences and lagging for other reasons. I helped first graders with remedial reading a couple of times a month. The noise level alone was enough to be distracting, but I remember the teacher passing out all at once something like 7 different dittos of subject matter to be completed by the children, and they aren't numbered but titled, and there is a list on the board of in what order they need to complete them and return them to bins that are labeled for each one that are at a long table in the front of the classroom.

So picture this: You've got 5 or 6 kids at each of these rather large tables with centerpieces of crayons and pencils, anywhere from 35 to 42 pieces of paper at each table with kids reaching across to get the crayons and pencils they need as the papers get knocked off onto the floor and mixed up. This chaos is exacerbated by the background voice of the teacher in the other part of the classroom giving her instructions. Imagine how some poor child with ADD might fare in one of these settings? I don't what they were thinking, or if they were.

Sue,

You're quite welcome.

"So picture this: You've got 5 or 6 kids at each of these rather large tables with centerpieces of crayons and pencils . . "

Well, that's pretty easy . . I truncated my experience quite a bit here, and what actually happened when I first went to the principle, was that Alyssa got put into a "combination class" (1st/2nd), with me as an assistant type. It actually worked OK (A really great teacher, Alyssa got to do things like read to the other kids sometimes, and I love being with children), but after just a month or two, sufficient shifting of kids within the district meant the end of that deal. Alyssa was put in a regular first grade class, and I watched first hand as she sat there in a virtual stupor while stuff that had no relevance to her droned on and on. (I was used as a gopher, basically, by that teacher, and was rather bored myself).

That's when I went to the Super, and got permission to take her out early, for the rest of that year and the next.

Nice to know the open classroom worked for Alyssa, John. I was really excited about it when I first learned of it, but that experience I related was not at all what it was supposed to have been about. Glad also that you were able to intervene when Alyssa was no longer able to take advantage of it.

PS~ The teacher of the combination class was a veteran of many years, and wouldn't have any part of that "sight reading".

"You'll learn more about how to deal with other people."

More often than not, kids merely become like other people.......

That comment made me think of a class I had in junior year, the only religion class I had taught by a priest with a topic that seemed to go on forever, identity crisis. Whether I was just too immature to be that introspective or whetther I was just too busy being me, or a combination of the two, I'm nor sure, but I just didn't relate to it. In fact, I still remember him calling on me to give my input on the topic, and I started out my answer by telling him that I couldn't identify with identity crisis. My friends thought it was funny, but he didn't. Good thing I didn't also telll him I thought he might still be going through it because he had such a pompous air about him, and I always perceived him as kind of phony.

Home schooling, in my view, would provide an impetus to the child’s learning capacity, bring him in the right frame of mind and allow him to achieve the level of study in areas where he may have lagged behind. Schooling and learning by children is one criteria parents should take care of during the childhood days and often times a child merely loses his grip over studies because he may not had sufficient time to dwell on a particular topic or subject. Children are of various capacities and at times merely due to some understanding problems at school, the child tends to lag behind. This deficiency can be taken care of by home schooling where the child gets to have a better grip of the very subjects which are taught in the school. Moreover, studies whether it be at school or at home, they can only add to child’s knowledge and giving the child some time to study at home as well will only enrich his level of knowledge. Rather than having the child’s mind diverted to other areas, it is always best to get the child to devote some time to studies as well besides the regular schooling. Either way, it can only enrich the child’s knowledge bank and provide him a better chance to succeed better in the overall studies.

It surely can have all those positive effects and so many more, depending on a lot of factors. For just an instance, consider a mother with toddler twins who also is home schooling a 6 year old. I'm not saying it isn't doable, but it does require a lot of planning and discipline and, as a rule, I don't see most Americans as that disciplined.

Suze, I would never dispute your point of view. But it was just a brainwave that struck me. Because, this fast changing world needs children to sit more over their elbow-greese than viling away their time with TV sets or badminton. These the latter are surely essential but more vital of them is study. To drive more knowledge into little brains than giving them freedom to enjoy the world, for which they have their whole life. Anyway, thanks for your input and I would not disagree in the least with you.

Vinod, I certainly hope that if you ever do dsipute my point of view that you will feel free to express yourself because you are one of the relatively few people whose opposing opinion I would respect and seriously consider. :)

You know, whether it was because of the way I raised him, or whether it was because he was athletic, or a litlle of both, my son was never a TV watcher, and for this I was grateful. I'm glad we didn't have computers when he was young, though I did have a computerized phonics and reading device that I used as a tool to teach him how to read when he was 4 .

When I think of all this, I think how different parenting methods are. I guess TV was pretty new then, but in the years from around 4-6 I watched more TV in those years than I probably watched in my life. I hated cartoons, but was very into sitcoms, westerns, soap operas, and anything that had an air of reality to it that was frightening. I think I got sick of TV fairly early on too, though.

I should probably add that TV for me in those years also served to pique my own play imagination. For instance, there was a show called the Gale Storm Show where the main character was a hostess on a cruise ship. I would use our enclosed front porch as the ship and my china sets and someimes my dolls, greeting and serving the imaginary guests and recreatng the stories.

I also had a cowgirl outfit complete with hat, guns and a holster to recreate shows like Gunsmoke and the Lone Ranger. Of course, the soap operas might have caused me to like to play doctor with my mother's friends' boys a little too early. :)

Suze dear, that was very sweet of you dear to have said that you would respect my opinion. Personally, I do not believe in enforcing something and I have far greater respect for you especially for your qualities to "never say no", which happens to be my weakness. Anyway, thanks for everything and I feel the discussion has reached a logical conclusion that one need not force too much studies into children that could tell detrimentally in their future life. Thanks Suze dear.

I don't know about the banning part but I do know many children who are/have been home schooled and the one thing I have noticed about them is that they all seem more successful later in life, self confident, mature, calm, thoughtful, logical, well mannered and better educated.

I wonder if this is due to the fact they don't have to
pass through metal detectors,
drug sniffing dogs,
be plagued by having the right shoes or clothes to have social status,
be beaten up, shot or killed because they wore a color associated with a gang
or give in to peer pressure.

They are not exposed to bomb threats,
campus riots,
other kids who have been driven to mad shooting sprees
and all the other malady's that exist in the schools today that allows them to concentrate on their studies?

You bring up a lot of good points that hadn't even occurred to me because they aren't experiences I've ever had to deal with, but those who have children in school now do, and these are all crucial to consider.

(I did have to deal with the designer clothes, or my wallet did, and the footwear was even worse. It seemed that Michael Jordan came out with a new pair of designer basketball shoes at around a hundred bucks a pop more often than some people change their underwear.)

I think you covered it all there Debra. I have a dear friend and his wife home-schooled their 8 kids and every one of them turned out to be a model child. But she is the kind of woman that makes things happen.

Years ago, I was against home schooling, I felt that it would create too much tension in the parent/child relationship to add in a "teacher/student" aspect. However, with the continuing "dumbing down" and the increasing propagandizing rampant in the public schools, I now have changed my mind.

Part of that is due to the national testing showing overall better performance ratios for home schoolers and part is due to my observations of the "home schoolers" that I have met and known over the years.

Each parent's ability is crucial to the outcome, but then so is each teacher's ability; some are still teaching only because of tenure, not competence.

Very true, Nora.

I thought it was so they could all be in public schools and sing praises to our dear leader.

I read this morning that he does want to shorten summer vacations ........ so they'll have more time to write those essays about how they can help President Obama. (OK, I made that last part up)

Well, he does want to shorten summer vacations, and yours is as good a reason as any.

I believe that it should be allowed BUT I doo believe that the parent should have more than the basic G.E.D. or high school dipolma to teach in such a fashion. I know of several people who made that choice due to the fact that they just didn't want to answer questions to why the child(ren) aren't in school and figure that home school would cut out the issues of that nature. They are the ones usually doing the school work not the children. In the long run the child has wasted a lot of time that could have been spent in school instead of being allowed to do whatever they want.
There should be someone from the school board who checks on the child and the child shouldn't be allowed to be home schooled if they miss alot of school or the parents are in the process of being reported unless the child has a health problem that requires they miss a lot of school.

oh and actually a child with AD/HD can fair pretty well in public school if people would stop pushing them in the "special" classes until the meds kick in. If some of the refine sugar and red dyes are at the very least reduced in their diet. Everytime I turn around my son has been given some form of candy or sugared water that was served at a school party and don't get me started on Fruit Loops LMAO!!!!!

Kimberly,

"I believe that it should be allowed BUT I doo believe that the parent should have more than the basic G.E.D. or high school dipolma to teach in such a fashion."

Some details from that link Sue provided in her discourse with me, up above there;

"A 1994 report by the Educational Testing Service found that half of the nation's college graduates could not read a bus schedule and that only 42 percent could summarize an argument presented in a newspaper article or contrast the views in two editorials about fuel efficiency."

Any assumptions that being exposed to "institutional education" longer, results in automatic increases in ones ability to use reason, or do things like teach young children the basics of reading and the like, are based on the assumption that "institutional education" is inherently superior, I think. Such an assumption, in the context of this discussion, may be little more than a form of circular reasoning, to some extent, I feel.

Oh don't get me wrong I am not saying home school is bad but like in the area I live in alot more parents are claiming to be doing this in order to not have to answer for things that set off red flags. There are cases of parents who don't know the basic reading and writing skills.

One woman I knew actually encouraged her 13 year's goal to hit 16 so he could drop out to devote more time to sleeping. That's where I think the children should be in school instead of beingg home schooled. Btw sorry for the typo in do earlier. Not helping my case any with that in there LMAO!!!!!

Kimberly,

It's not all that hard to give an occasional test, to see that the children of a "teacher-parent" are getting the basics. Assuming that poor "parent-teachers" are so, because they didn't get more "institutional education", is the very same "circular reasoning", I say, dressed a bit differently.

Requiring a degree, in order to teach one's own child, is tantamount to a "dictatorship" of institutional education, I feel.

Ban home schooling? Would this not be a bit unconstitutional ... not mentioning how harmful it would become to the many who benefit from it?

Right now, there's nothing in the body of the post.. just some lines. I'm assuming its being rewritten?