bostonbubble.com

[CL]

My 2 cents

- I think going to school, and learning, is more than knowledge intake (which I agree would be better if done at home by dedicated parents instead of teachers).

- I think the influence from fellow students (both good or bad) is more important than teachers. Which is why in choosing schools, you are essentially choosing peers.

- I do like the idea of home-schooling, although I don't have confidence in myself to be a good teacher. Having that said, there is no reason why you cannot have both (public/private schooling during the day, additional home schooling at night). Given how lax the US cirriculum is, this can be acheived.

[Guest]

There is online schooling programs for home-schooled kids as well as
GED.
Of course I'm biased because I'm a teacher, but I don't think anything
can take the place of good old fashioned classroom learning.

Independent learning really presumes a lot about the kid's initiative
and motivation.

As I said, we usually have to struggle to get them to do their homework
much of the time as it is.

Someone mentioned tablets. That's a great idea. No more big clunky textbooks.

And about parental involvement: As public school educators,
we unfortunately can't assume these kids go home to the best
situations for learning.

[GenXer]

Let me put it this way: only SOME kids can benefit from formal schooling. We have no idea what percentage, but it is not 100%, or even 90%. I'd be surprised if its even 50%. We just don't know, because we've never tried anything. This is why kids are disinterested. There is nothing that can get them interested - school sucks for a large percentage of kids who are 'left behind' simply because nobody has tried giving them a chance at doing what they WANT to do, rather than what they are told to do for no reason. A good percentage of teachers are not going to inspire anybody to learn - they themselves don't know that much unless they've worked in the industry for a while and have first-hand experience. Any half-literate mother can teach her kids to read and write - you don't need a school for that. Schools are sucking public money yet most of the money is wasted, and is never going to students. But worse than that, its the curriculum that is a complete waste of time. We are not educating a statistical average student. They are human beings with their own interests. Nobody needs to spend 4 years in a history class when they can simply read on their own. And nobody needs to be TOLD what to read. If that's the case, then we are wasting our time because how many poeple live by what other people tell them to do? Public schools are for educating 9-5 average compliant government and big company workers (including teachers). If you want your kids to grow up independent and able to learn by themselves, avoid public schools at all costs, unless your kids need structure (which by the way is not that hard to provide at home as well).

In the process of not 'leaving behind' kids, we've left behind all of the bright kids who need to be challenged. MA is one of the last states in the country when it comes to giving smart kids opportunities to advance. And this comes from a local pro-school magazine - Boston Parent, if I remember correctly. Why are we surprised at the results?

I actually think that the process of homeschooling is a good way to save a lot of money despite having only 1.5 incomes at best (and only one income on average). With good preparation, this is a great way to save a lot of money by renting and by avoding expensive school districts, as well as by getting kids to be more independent (thus, less of a money drain in the future). Kids can try to open their own business, get a paer route, do some volunteering work, all while they are very young. Most poeple don't need any college - at least not the brick and mortar ones. They can take the classes online that they need, and they can try to open and run their own business. A degree is nice if you want to get a day job, but it appears that most people who buy houses in rich towns (especially recently) are pretty much tied to their day jobs which don't lend themselves to opening their own business. This is a risk in itself - with mobility and outsourcing, nobody can say whether your job will be there 10 years from now (even 5 years in some cases - think Fidelity and others who left the state).

[Boston ITer]

[wherzmyhome]

I have to agree with Guest. Homeschooling is a little too extreme in my book. I mean for those who can manage it, great! I would still want the option of sending kids to school. It is about the whole experience with peers, teachers and the school environment.

Being an engineer, I am ok with providing that extra push to my kids in Math and Science to realize their full potential, if the school is not challenging them enough, but cannot imagine myself being their full time teacher. Plus, they will surely learn more from their experiences in school, than from hanging around me all day.

[Kaidran]

I think homeschooling is too much for most people to stomach. I'm just curious what experiences left Genxer so jaded. Would you care to elaborate?

[Boston ITer]

[Kaidran]

There were lengthy discussions of homeschooling vs conventional but I dont remember anything about what caused Genxer to have these extreme views. Maybe I missed it. From other discussions it does not seem like he has much connection to education in general so I'm just curious where it comes from.

[BK]

Kaidran,

Can anyone provide any data on under performance of home schooled children?

The fact is there was a time in American history when Americans had surrendered so much responsibility of education to Professionals - the better performing students have interested parents who know there are lots of lousy teachers in the Educational system and they need to be vigilant.

Work was once centered around the home or the small farm (for most of human history). Parents were able to spend more time instructing children on farming, cooking, money, and life.

The cubicle centered world that we think is the standard for work and has altered family - where one or both parents are away from their children for 40 hours or more has existed for only a brief moment in time.

Everyone that is attacking GenXer - should ask is the Cubicle Center work world and children spending less time with Parents really working for our society?
Home schooling may sound radical - but, how many know any home school families?

[Boston ITer]

[Kaidran]

Well there are a whole heap of assumptions in there. What are you envisioning for a "post-American century", fewer jobs or Thunderdome? We can only hope to train kids to operate in the world we see coming. I still see school as a good trial run for life. There is the opportunity to learn, having access to information and a professional to explain it. There are group activities and the need to work together. And there are plenty of assholes which kids will have to learn to deal with sooner or later. I dont really buy the peers argument because kids do not interact equally with every other kid in the school, they set up their own like minded groups. I'm guessing that even Newton has a stoner group. Teaching to the mean is the concern I have. I had heard that bussed in kids to Lexington are overwhelmingly Sp Ed. Not because they really need it but because they have not covered enough material to keep up with the regular class.

I am sorry if I am using loaded words, it is hard not to when describing homeschooling, unless you are yourself an advocate. The people that I know who did it was either because of religion or parental fear that other kids will corrupt their angels. (Anyone seen the South Park homeschool episode?) If people here are talking about it purely for the quality and life experience then you are looking at the fringe of a system that is already outside of the mainstream. I think you have the best intentions and that maybe you think you would have responded better to that. As far as I know none of us have older kids so I am not convinced that I can say that for my kids. I did very well out of a classical education and am certain I would have been too lazy or shy to take more worldly opportunities at that age. Maybe my kids will be different but I have no desire to gamble on that without seeing how they deal with the current setup. Based on what I have seen so far there are just a lot of dedicated people with very good intentions.

[Kaidran]

I dont have any data on homeschooling. I can tell you I am concerned about people so fearful of secular "agendas" that they homeschool make me nervous. I have no doubt that Genxer and BostonITer would do a great job for their kids. Statistics on homeschooling cover a lot of ground and lumping everything together is not a fair assessment whatever the outcome. It is again trying to imagine other situations. I have no doubt that all posters here want the best for their kids and have the ability to deliver, regardless of choices. The problem is that I dont feel that the posters here are a fair representation of the general population and as such are not in a great position to argue policy.

It comes back to my question a few posts back. What happened to give G and B such a bad vibe with schools? My own experiences were not fantastic but gave me a good education and an environment to grow. I learned a lot socially and left with a lot of subject knowledge. So far my experience with MA schools is still at the early grade level but I have not seen anything to make me concerned.

[Boston ITer]

Well, in all honesty, it isn't that school is some horror show a/o waste of time. I mean it's fine for kids, meaning kids less than 13 years of age, to gather for all day structured activities. Afterwards, the picture sort of changes and cliques start to solidify around many things, including one's socioeconomic standing.

In my experience, I grew up in more than one town in the Boston area. One of them was an Immune one. Unfortunately, along with my older sibling, the family started playing 'Keeping Up With Jones' and there was a sort of internal stress which never subsided. As a teen, I was surprised to hear certain kids talk about United vs American vs Delta airlines, as if they were adults at a business class lounge. Granted, as an adult, I'd flown more times than I could count but as a kid, I seldom saw the insides of an airplane outside of a movie.

All and all, I got along with many persons. I didn't even have trouble w/ the so-called A-holes. The number of real friends from Immune HS, however, was lower than the folks I'd met, from various activities outside of the HS, including other towns.

My annoyance with the educated authority figures was that numerous teachers had advanced degrees but were focused upon pet subjects. They didn't always cover all the material for the AP exams or the national level Olympiads but were off on their own tangential political science or philosophical ideologies. Granted, if you agreed with them, it might have been an interesting sideshow but for the most part, I wasn't there to entertain my instructors.

Also, I'd sensed that many persons did extracurriculars and started organizations for the sake of appearance and resume padding. I mean it's as if one starts an editorial section, not for a special poll/opinion, but to tout one's leadership abilities, as if one was a applicant to an MBA program. I guess many of these folks would later opt for management consulting as a career.

One of the things I'd wanted was someone who could show me how to write the college 'Research Paper' but instead, was inundated with teachers' various movements and authors but they had little interest in the students' personal development besides criticizing them that they weren't doing enough. Also, I didn't know about the Pimsleur or Michel Thomas language styles until I was an adult. I would have rather have started with those and I might have maintained my interest in languages into college. Also, we didn't have private Kumon-tutoring for math/reading back then. Despite all the shortcomings in the system, my parents never complained to any school authorities. They assumed that those in charge were all powerful and could punish one's career from afar.

All and all, I was somewhat disappointed with the overall experience. I honestly believe that I could have dropped out and gotten an Extension or London Univ bachelors, in place of HS, if I had a mentor like myself back at the start of junior HS. Instead, my parents basically stated that one's suppose to attend Immune HS because that's what people did. They fell into the trap of believing that appearances were the real deal.

[GenXer]

If anybody wants to know some history of public schools in the US, please read this book:

http://mhkeehn.tripod.com/ughoae.pdf


This is the future I want for my kids:

http://kidzbusiness.com/

I think Boston ITer and I share similar understanding of what a school can be good for. If by the age of 13 kids can not learn by themselves, they are going to be left behind by the society, which owes them nothing. They can cling to structure provided by a school and be totally at the mercy of the quality of their education. This may be good for maybe 50% of the kids.

Then there is everything else besides public schools. It is about giving kids a much larger playing field, and by giving them a head start.

I try to see what it is I would like my kids to do in the future, or at least, to have an ability to do. And it comes down to giving them an opportunity to become wealthy by working for themselves. I do not anticipate giving them any money towards their college, or for their wedding or for buying a house. I do intend to give them tools to earn a lot more than an average stiff can by teaching them to be able to do anything they want. This means avoiding getting into the 'degree mill'.

Also, schools pretty much destroy many talented kids because in places like MA schools dumb down, not smarten up. Private schools may be a bit better, but the question is, what is the purpose of a school?

To get into college? Why? Most degrees are useless - they are not even good for low paying jobs. Then why go to college?

To get a law or medical degree and then declare bankruptcy right after? To overpay for a degree that is worthless?

To become a working stiff at the mercy of your employer? Why?

To worry all your life that you'll be laid off and that the next job will make you sell your house or move to another state?

To spend more time at work than with your family?

To never make enough money to really do what you want to do? (which is what exactly, given that you have a day job you will keep for a long time?)

To finally get laid off when you are 60, and nobody wanting to hire you again, even while you planned to work to 70 to pay for kids' college and a house in Newton?

What is the end goal of going to school, then going to college?

If you can answer this question, you can understand why I believe this is a flawed path, and a huge waste of time, money and energy.

I prefer a shortcut. Let the drones and those who can only think the way they are told to think enter the rat race and compete against each other by wasting huge amounts of money.

There is a better way. Homeschooling nowadays isn't what it used to be. Kids can take classes at local schools/universities, as well as many local private coops and classes offered by many small mom/pop outfits, as well as at places like MIT and Harvard where they have many programs for kids. It takes a lot of work for the parents to get their kids educated, but it is worth it. It does not cost that much money - only time and devotion from parents. Its easy to throw your kids overboard and let some strangers educate them. Its a lot more difficult, and a lot more rewarding to educate them yourself, because only you will be responsible for the results.

[Daria]