When Does Homeschooling Fail?


Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, mrmarklin said:

Biggest single advantage of private school is that behavioral problems are simply not tolerated. In addition a certain minimum of parent participation is required. My experience is with Catholic/Christian schools..

Depends entirely on the school. Some private schools specifically cater to students with behavior problems. Some private schools, depending on how they're set up, are still subject to FAPE and can't necessarily get rid of some behavior problems as easy as that (if the behavior problem is due to a student condition).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎4‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 7:37 PM, The Folk Prophet said:

Yeah....let's sit down and show our 2-year-old all of the Saw and Hostel movies and then follow it up with some hardcore pornography, because...you know...it builds character. <_<

I know you put this in here for irony but...

While I haven't actually taught the kids, I am very much aware of a group of siblings at my school who have serious issues because daddy decided to "homeschool" (actually, skirt the law and not do any schooling) and make them watch hardcore pornography.

It's an awful, awful situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
39 minutes ago, Backroads said:

I know you put this in here for irony but...

While I haven't actually taught the kids, I am very much aware of a group of siblings at my school who have serious issues because daddy decided to "homeschool" (actually, skirt the law and not do any schooling) and make them watch hardcore pornography.

It's an awful, awful situation.

There will always be situations like that, tragically. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Backroads said:

I know you put this in here for irony but...

While I haven't actually taught the kids, I am very much aware of a group of siblings at my school who have serious issues because daddy decided to "homeschool" (actually, skirt the law and not do any schooling) and make them watch hardcore pornography.

It's an awful, awful situation.

This is a valid concern.  I don't mean the pornography, because parents do that to their public schooled kids.  While a travesty and what I'd consider "moral abuse," it isn't really relevant to this discussion since home/public/private schooling has nothing to do with that.  Parents will do that (or not do that) regardless of what school their kids go to.  However, I strongly object to parents who keep their kids at home and DON'T educate them.  That makes no sense for anyone.  So, let me address that part of the discussion because, this is at least a reasonable point of discussion.  And this isn't necessarily for you, but for the forum.

I believe that we have a question of education vs. indoctrination.  To explain this, we have to understand the difference between educating vs. indoctrinating.

Quote

Indoctrinate: to instruct in a doctrine, principle, ideology, etc., especially to imbue with a specific partisan or biased belief or point of view.

Quote

Educate:

1. to develop the faculties and powers of (a person) by teaching,instruction, or schooling.

2. to qualify by instruction or training for a particular calling, practice,etc.; train:

3.to provide training for.

4.to develop or train (the ear, taste, etc.):

5. to inform:

The main difference is ideology, vs. knowledge and understanding.  Parents who bring children home for ideology AND fail to educate them in anything are usually doing it wrong.  

If we can trust schools to simply educate rather than indoctrinate, then there would be much less of a problem.  Remember that my primary argument about my family's "success" was that we may have sacrificed some secular learning for gaining spiritual strength.  If they do not hinder parental and church ideological development, then why wouldn't we public school?

The problem is that it is almost impossible to educate without indoctrination.  It is always a question of who's ideology and who's doing the indoctrinating.  Even if some are able to achieve this Herculean feat of educating without indoctrination, I believe such achievement would be a dangerous practice.  If a child has NO indoctrination, what fills in the gaps?

Another reason why one either cannot do it, or walks on treacherous ground, if one educates without morality is this.  How do we know if we are educated?  When we can:

  1. Read like a lawyer
  2. Write like a founding father
  3. Calculate like an entrepreneur
  4. Serve like a disciple of Christ.

Reading, Writing, Arithmetic, and Righteousness (Four "R"s, not just three) are ALL part of a balanced education.  But if we have to choose, which one do you consider most important?

It is better to have ignorant and evil instead of educated and evil.  It is better to be good and ignorant than evil and educated.  But, yes, it is best to be both good AND educated.

Yes, we have the success stories of some parents who are able to successfully guide and teach their children the morals and lessons of the gospel and just plain good, clean living in SPITE of the ideological issues that abound in the public school system today.  But is that the norm?  How many teens get out of high school as virgins?  How many have never taken drugs or drunk alcohol by the time they graduate?

I said I had a great public school experience because of a few great teachers sprinkled in there.  But I still came out of high school believing in anthropogenic global warming.  I came out thinking that seeing the latest movie and knowing all the Hollywood gossip was the end all and be all of being "in tune" with society.  I came out of school thinking that service was something that we "had to do" so we didn't feel guilty when we played.  I came out imitating characters on TV and movies, rather than classical figures and scriptural figures.  I came out of high school with a messed up sense of morality and sense of people. And there was a penalty to be paid because of this.  And all that in spite of the fact that I went to church every week and knew all the teachings and intellectually knew right and wrong.  It wasn't internalized as it should have been because I spent most of my time with other children who did not share those values.

So, I was evil and highly educated.  And I thought the purpose of early education was for morality and later education was for secular things.  But apparently many don't see it that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You make a lot of sense, @Carborendum; and I daresay you're doing it right for your family.  I would just make the following observations: 

20 hours ago, Carborendum said:

I'd say "detectable" rather than recognizable.  I've come across too many situations where I felt something prick me spiritually.  But it is often so subtle that I don't truly "recognize" what it was.  Only after I've had a moment to look back and analyze it do I realize what that very subtle prick was.

Of course not.  That's why I spoke of the whole armor of God.  No mortal is so wise and knowledgeable that he can hope to combat all evil in the world that might be thrown at them.  Satan has at least 6000 years of studying all the divers means of evil on this earth for us to truly be able to take care of it.  But the Armor of God, when properly used, will protect us.  And I believe that those in public school  -- especially in today's world are at such a spiritual disadvantage, that they may not make it through basic training before they're lost.

The concern I would have here is that it sort of assumes a binary paradigm--kids are either ready, or not ready, to handle what the world throws at them with the same level of competence as we, their parents, who are in our thirties or forties.  What is it that makes a public high school so dangerous for a seventeen-year-old, but renders a state university completely appropriate for an eighteen-year-old?  Given that we know brain development continues through the mid-twenties, wouldn't the safest course for us as parents be to insist that our kids do their advanced education via correspondence courses/distance learning, rather than actually going to a university?  

Quote

Interesting term "shielding".  I believe that's conflating "protecting" vs. "keeping them in ignorance" based on the context above.  This sounds too much like "teaching children the law of chastity means they won't know how to have kids when they get married."  Uhmm.. No.

We protect them, so far as possible, from the evils of the world and the lies the adversary would teach them.  But if we deliberately keep them ignorant of those things, I'd believe we're doing them a disservice.  I can't speak for everyone, but I have PPIs with my children as often as I can to teach them exactly what the world is like and what lies are our there -- not only about right and wrong, but I also go over anti-Mormon literature and go over apologetics' responses to them as well as the simple truth about such accusations.  You have to.  Why would you not?  Basically, I'm teaching my children to become apologists.

A clarification, and then an observation:  First, I couched it in terms of the child's perception--"if they feel we have spent their entire childhoods deliberately shielding them from (or “misrepresenting”) the exciting new secularist theories they are encountering for the very first time".  As I said earlier, if my kid makes it to university before ever interacting with--say--an honest-to-gosh communist, and that professor is more persuasive about communism and/or better informed about some facets of communism than I am (both of which are very possible), there's a strong possibility that my kid will feel as though I've concealed or misrepresented something.  I think first-hand experience with resisting academic authority figures in a more-or-less controlled setting, may be a boon to many children in such situations. 

Second, as important as topical and tactical innoculation/apologetics is--we can never foresee every possible dig that's going to come up, whether our kids are sixteen or eighteen or twenty-three.  For example:  I have an old high school friend who is now about as much of a libertine, secularist, communist, feminazi as you could imagine.  She just got her PhD in medieval studies, couldn't get a job with it, and is now teaching high school.  She won't teach her students about Marx; but she often drops hints about how Rome fell largely because the centralized government wasn't maintaining roads and harbors.  She won't denounce God; but she'll slip in little asides about how monotheistic religions tend to be less tolerant than polytheistic religions.  Both of these arguments have significant amounts of truth in them, and might not immediately trip alarm bells on a teenager's spiritual sensors.  But they plant little seeds that could grow into something very problematic over time.  

Now, again, every kid is different; and some parents are certainly more skilled innoculators than others.  But given that my kids are going to hear this stuff regardless--and more stuff that I can't possibly anticipate--as for me and my family, I think I'd rather be part of the ongoing process as my kids are exposed to these ideas and show that yes, as a parent I am aware of them and have engaged with them and am comfortable refuting them; rather than simply having my kid go off to college and come back for Christmas saying "guess what I learned that you, Dad, were too closed-minded to ever consider?" after their professors have had an entire semester to play inside their heads.  

Quote

But it is like going through a simulation rather than a real event.  Drivers have to see films and when I was a kid, we had driving simulators we had to log hours on before driving.  Pilots have to go through a flying simulator.  Just ask Elder Uchtdorf.  Why would you not put your children through the spiritual equivalent at home in a safe and controlled setting?

Ah, yes . . . but we don't just turn them loose after the simulator and assume them to be fully qualified; we put them in a cockpit/driver's seat for real-world experience with a reliable instructor in close proximity.   One might argue that high school (assuming it is safe from influences like violence, sexual harassment, and pornography) can be akin to having an intellectual "learner's permit" before being given full licensure.

Quote

And on the flip side of the coin, what guarantees do you have that your child will simply accept what the teacher says in public school without even bringing it up to you?

We had an online Christian based homeschool program that we subscribed to.  One day my (I believe 10 year old at the time) son was crying in front of the computer.  Apparently, the "history" course contained an excerpt directly from an anti-Mormon tract when going over the history of Illinois in the 1800s.  We were able to address it because we saw him crying AT HOME.  But if he had that happen in public school, he would have cried.  The teacher would have comforted him and said that he would just have to let his faith go because now he knows the truth.  After he calmed down, they'd talk nice and sweet to him and warn him not to tell his parents.  And we would lose him.

When I read the material, we went over every item, line by line.  After we were about half way through, he finally got the idea and said, "OK, I get it.  Don't pay attention to them."  Even then, I had to correct him.  No, you can't just "not pay attention".  Look for answers.  Don't just let it fester.  Find the truth behind it.  But have faith as you do so.

First off, sorry this happened to your family; and props for the way you handled it. 

Second, though, for the sake of argument:  I hope you won't be offended if I suggest that this is one of those assymetrical comparisons between homeschooling and public schooling that I find a little frustrating.  In your public school scenario you're relying on a rather tenuous chain of events, including 1) that the public school teacher would even want to devote large blocks of in-class time to the theological teachings of a religion that is frankly little more than a footnote in American history; 2) that the teacher would think they could get away with it given the constraints of parental, elected, and judicial oversight they work under; 3) that the child would react as the teacher hoped; and 4) that the child would keep the conflict secret from his or her parents.  I think a more likely scenario is the possibility of a few snide comments in class, followed by an extensive homework reading assignment; which attentive parents would then be able to recognize and counteract just as you did--with an added bonus of this being, if handled well, an example of why my child shouldn't always trust someone else's analysis even if they seem to be both highly charismatic/caring and better informed/a better debater than my child is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, mrmarklin said:

Because you live in Saratoga Springs UT.

And from that information you can see my entire background, everywhere I've lived, everywhere I've been, all the friends I've had, who I've associated with, etc. Wow. Impressive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Backroads said:

I know you put this in here for irony but...

While I haven't actually taught the kids, I am very much aware of a group of siblings at my school who have serious issues because daddy decided to "homeschool" (actually, skirt the law and not do any schooling) and make them watch hardcore pornography.

It's an awful, awful situation.

 And that person should be jailed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two things come to mind as I read your post above @Just_A_Guy, 1 what are the chances of a Utah hs student encountering an honest to goodness communist before college anyhow? 2 I, personally, think that university is a flipping waste of time and money for most people anyhow. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Two things come to mind as I read your post above @Just_A_Guy, 1 what are the chances of a Utah hs student encountering an honest to goodness communist before college anyhow? 2 I, personally, think that university is a flipping waste of time and money for most people anyhow. 

(TFP, I meant my laugh in a good-natured mutual chuckle sort of way; not a mocking sort of way. ;) )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/7/2018 at 9:09 AM, The Folk Prophet said:

That depends on what criteria one uses to define the extremely subjective word, "hell".

Basically, if you believe that your neighborhood is hell, then you can say your school is hell and the subjectivity is consistently applied - whatever that is.  So, unless you expect your kids to leave your house only to go to church then calling the neighborhood school hell is pretty much the same as My kids are growing up in hell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/7/2018 at 9:19 AM, The Folk Prophet said:

You make people snow-flaky by teaching them snow-flaky values. You know...the ones that dominate public schools.

@anatess2 is definitely right in one regard...the parent makes the main difference. What she seems to miss is that the (taken to the extreme example) good parent would not teach them good principles at home and then drop them off at the whore or crack house. That's not good parenting.

Obviously where public schools sit in the whore house to holy house spectrum is up for debate --- but the idea that one can just disregard what they consider a whore/crack house environment if they just teach their children right is a bit silly.

No.  I did not miss anything.  Good parents don’t send their kids to crackhouses.  What you seem to miss is that my kids’ Public Schools are not crackhouses or whorehouses or even remotely close to it.  If you’re gonna do that kind of extreme labeling you better make sure we can’t point to an Apostle who sends his kids to Public School.

Edited by anatess2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

No.  I did not miss anything.  Good parents don’t send their kids to crackhouses.  What you seem to miss is that my kids’ Public Schools are not crackhouses or whorehouses or even remotely close to it.  If you’re gonna do that kind of extreme labeling you better make sure we can’t point to an Apostle who sends his kids to Public School.

You don't seem to understand what an example is or to be able to follow the correlating logic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

You make a lot of sense, @Carborendum; and I daresay you're doing it right for your family.

Thanks, I appreciate the compliment.

Quote

The concern I would have here is that it sort of assumes a binary paradigm--kids are either ready, or not ready, to handle what the world throws at them with the same level of competence as we, their parents, who are in our thirties or forties.  What is it that makes a public high school so dangerous for a seventeen-year-old, but renders a state university completely appropriate for an eighteen-year-old?  Given that we know brain development continues through the mid-twenties, wouldn't the safest course for us as parents be to insist that our kids do their advanced education via correspondence courses/distance learning, rather than actually going to a university?  

I didn't really intend that.  And I hope that the body of posts throughout this thread indicate that I do not believe it to be completely binary.  And certainly in many venues and other similar threads, I've indicated to people that (I'll say it again) there is no silver bullet.  I don't believe that just because one homeschools, then ALL the evils of the world will be done away.  That is just as ignorant as saying all homeschoolers are socially awkward.

Yes, it is a question of degrees and varies from family to family, individual to individual, and school to school.  But even in the degrees of accountability, the Lord provided a line in the sand.  I highly doubt that means that EVERY 8 y.o. is fully cognizant of the consequences of ALL their choices at the moment they've gone around the sun exactly 8 times from the moment they took their first breath. 

Yes, there will need to be some point where, even when not "completely" prepared for the world, we need to let them loose on it.  And the law says that is at a maximum of 18 years.  But I certainly don't think that should be 5 years old.

Quote

A clarification, and then an observation:  First, I couched it in terms of the child's perception--"if they feel we have spent their entire childhoods deliberately shielding them from (or “misrepresenting”) the exciting new secularist theories they are encountering for the very first time".  As I said earlier, if my kid makes it to university before ever interacting with--say--an honest-to-gosh communist, and that professor is more persuasive about communism and/or better informed about some facets of communism than I am (both of which are very possible), there's a strong possibility that my kid will feel as though I've concealed or misrepresented something.  I think first-hand experience with resisting academic authority figures in a more-or-less controlled setting, may be a boon to many children in such situations. 

You're absolutely right here.  And there is a danger of "ignorant indoctrination" as well.  One of the strong arguments from (I'll label it) anti-homeschoolers is that if a parent makes a mistake, that's all the children learn.  All of them learn the exact same mistake and never gets corrected.  Public schools push the children through different teachers every year.  So if one makes a mistake, they will get exposed to other learning.

And this isn't even solely about indoctrination.  To this day, 5 of the 7 children in my wife's home all don't understand there is a word "than".  They will always use "then".  Why?  Because that's what their Canadian educated mother taught them.  Two of them figured it out later because they cared.  The rest did not.

However, the dangers of indoctrination are much worse in public school.  First, the continual push for unification in public schooling means that whoever is in charge can with unilateral decision decide to educate all the children in all public schools the same.  When I witness the continual liberal agenda being pushed to the point that teachers are telling 10 year old kids that if they feel awkward going to a gay bar, then they're being intolerant, I wonder what kind of oversight there really is.

Quote

Second, as important as topical and tactical innoculation/apologetics is--we can never foresee every possible dig that's going to come up, whether our kids are sixteen or eighteen or twenty-three. 

I absolutely agree.  But does that mean that we shouldn't do the best we can?  Just because we know a certain percentage (a large percentage) of teens will have premarital sex, does that mean we just hand out free condoms instead of teaching abstinence?  Well, that's what public schools are doing.

Quote

Now, again, every kid is different; and some parents are certainly more skilled innoculators than others.  But given that my kids are going to hear this stuff regardless--and more stuff that I can't possibly anticipate--as for me and my family, I think I'd rather be part of the ongoing process as my kids are exposed to these ideas and show that yes, as a parent I am aware of them and have engaged with them and am comfortable refuting them; rather than simply having my kid go off to college and come back for Christmas saying "guess what I learned that you, Dad, were too closed-minded to ever consider?" after their professors have had an entire semester to play inside their heads.  

This is exactly what I was thinking of when I spoke of the armor of God.  Think about what armor is.  It is there when our skills and abilities aren't enough.  We have speed, strength, stamina, and hours and hours of practice.  This helps us be the combatant we need to be.  But when our training, skills, and abilities miss those few blows that get past our abilities, the armor of God will protect us.

My primary point, however, is that it is easier to teach our children to don the armor when we have more hours with them each day.  Is it possible to do it while public schooling?  Of course.  I would never deny that.  I'm saying that the advantage is heavily weighted towards homeschoolers.  But, yes, they have to take advantage of that advantage.

Quote

Ah, yes . . . but we don't just turn them loose after the simulator and assume them to be fully qualified; we put them in a cockpit/driver's seat for real-world experience with a reliable instructor in close proximity.   One might argue that high school (assuming it is safe from influences like violence, sexual harassment, and pornography) can be akin to having an intellectual "learner's permit" before being given full licensure.

That's true too.  And consider that even after being fully licensed, they are not "really" ready either.  And also consider that even very experienced and careful drivers will get into accidents at some point in their lives.  It's all a gradation.  I believe we both agree on that.  But I believe disagree on the parallels with such an analogy.

Concerns like this assume that just because they are taught at home doesn't mean they NEVER get any exposure outside.  At least, if you're going to do homeschooling properly (like many on this board do) there should be a lot of exposure.  In my family, we've had the following:

1) Church:  As a shining example of the diversity of thought, just look at the people on this board.  Even all the active, faithful members of the Church on this board have differing opinions on many aspects of social interaction.  And even doctrinal matters are often points of disagreement.  The Church is not so homogeneous in our ideologies as is commonly thought.
2) Homeschool groups: Even among homeschool families, there is a diversity of thought.  This is perhaps not so pronounced.  But the differences we do have are enough to at least provoke the discussion about topics and see why people think the way they do.  And we go over all that with our children.
3) Volunteer events: We have as individuals and families done many things for not only charity, but for simple every day things.  Our public library has an open position for volunteers to help catalogue books.  My daughter worked there as a volunteer for over a year before she was able to get a job under Texas child labor laws.  (So, it's legal to have them work for free.  But it is not legal to pay them for the work.  hmmm.)  Anyway, she had an interesting time looking at all sorts of books and movies with a tremendous diversity of thought there.
4) Work: Because they are homeschooled, they can work during the day when other kids are in school.  This has the interesting side effect of having them work with adults rather than other youth.  They mature faster working with more mature people than others their own age.
5) School: I don't mean homeschool.  Many families will participate in a part-time school or once a week school just for the purposes of enrichment and socialization.  We did that for a while.  But we moved away and they don't have stuff like that in Texas.  BUT, the college system here has "dual enrollment" which means that high school aged children may enroll for college classes at a discounted rate.  So, all our kids go to college at 14 while living at home.  They don't take it full-time.  Only one or two classes at a time.  My older kids take more.  But this slows the indoctrination at a rate we can work with. 

These and other methods employed by many homeschool families constitute the gradual process of getting them off the simulator and into the partner driving.  And eventually, still not quite prepared, they will go off to "the real world" (as if they don't already live in it).  But the relationships we've made, the habits they've made of praying for answers, seeking guidance of people you trust (like parents) prior to jumping into a decision on your own, is a better plan in my mind.

Quote

First off, sorry this happened to your family; and props for the way you handled it. 

Yeah, we really didn't expect that based on the description and the promises made and ...  We ended up dropping the curriculum.

Quote

I hope you won't be offended if I suggest that this is one of those assymetrical comparisons between homeschooling and public schooling that I find a little frustrating. 

I readily admit this is a special case.  I'm under no delusions there.  But sometimes, these special cases are what is needed to make a point.  i.e. many arguments against  homeschooling are likewise asymmetrical.  So, the other side of the coin to counter that must also be asymmetrical for proper balance.

I've made many concessions to public school proponents about the purported strengths of public school.  That's as it should be.  I'm just comparing apples to apples.  Look at the common vs. common; rare vs. rare; strength vs. strength; weakness vs. weakness.  That's as it should be.

From everything I've learned about it (and believe me, it was a hard sell.  It took years for me to change my mind on the topic) I've NEVER said that NO ONE can succeed through the public school system.  I've NEVER said that just because one homeschools to automatically have well adjusted, moral kids.  But when you compare apple to apples from the perspective that I outlined above, homeschool comes out on top.

Quote

In your public school scenario you're relying on a rather tenuous chain of events, including 1) that the public school teacher would even want to devote large blocks of in-class time to the theological teachings of a religion that is frankly little more than a footnote in American history; 2) that the teacher would think they could get away with it given the constraints of parental, elected, and judicial oversight they work under; 3) that the child would react as the teacher hoped; and 4) that the child would keep the conflict secret from his or her parents.  I think a more likely scenario is the possibility of a few snide comments in class, followed by an extensive homework reading assignment; which attentive parents would then be able to recognize and counteract just as you did--with an added bonus of this being, if handled well, an example of why my child shouldn't always trust someone else's analysis even if they seem to be both highly charismatic/caring and better informed/a better debater than my child is.

In this particular example, possibly.  But what really happened a few years ago when Al Gore told grade school children that they were smarter than their parents because they know about global warming while their parents denied it?  Some parents learned about it and were outraged.  Many other parents didn't hear a thing about it until it made the news.  Even then many parents may not have known their kids were in that group.  

While my example may be somewhat sensational, things similar to this do happen.  I don't have statistics on it, so it's just a personal impression.  But I believe it to be systemic based on the history of what the Prussian model of public schooling was specifically designed to do.

BTW, JAG, please understand that I hold you in very high regard.  If we disagree here, I understand we disagree.  But when certain oh-so-common issues like socialization and exposure to conflicting ideologies are brought up, I have to give the counter argument.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
18 hours ago, mirkwood said:

@MormonGator why you gotta drag me into your deluded KISSdom?

The irony of it all is that while I am a Kiss fan, I'm a much bigger fan of Megadeth, Iron Maiden, and the Ramones.  I know of some Kiss fans who can only talk about Kiss. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

The irony of it all is that while I am a Kiss fan, I'm a much bigger fan of Megadeth, Iron Maiden, and the Ramones.  I know of some Kiss fans who can only talk about Kiss. 

And to think we were worried! Clearly you have catholic tastes!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Vort said:

Which is reasonable. But when someone with experience in the area says that the hazard you perceive is not real, or overblown, or something, stubbornly maintaining your opinion doesn't really make much sense. And telling someone in Saratoga Springs that his Utah location makes his opinion invalid isn't very convincing. I live near Seattle, and I'm largely in agreement with TFP.

Funny how our perceptions are different. I found the picture he painted quite attractive indeed. My original homeschooling ideas had some of the same origins, and though things have not gone as I had originally envisioned, I believe my children are much better off for having been homeschooled to the extent they were (are).

I think the Utah Valley is a great place to live and raise a family. IMO, none better. I lived there myself for a time.  And I have near family in the area as well.  But I do know that living there is far different than most other areas in the US. And that colors perceptions of other places and societal norms. Most people in urban areas of this nation have two earner households to both have a lifestyle and afford housing. Daycare is very rampant and I suspect the family size differs as well.  These facts alone obviate home school as an option for the vast majority of families.  In my neighborhood we are nodding acquaintances at best with our neighbors. My wife is the only female home during working hours. When our children were being raised, they had no peers close enough to play with on a daily basis. 

So unless TFP has lived in other areas for extended periods I think his ideas of socialite are colored by his life experience in his current area. 

 

OP basically described his wife as someone who was math deficient and couldn’t spell. I wouldn’t want her teaching my children, and can only feel sorry for hers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Backroads said:

Depends entirely on the school. Some private schools specifically cater to students with behavior problems. Some private schools, depending on how they're set up, are still subject to FAPE and can't necessarily get rid of some behavior problems as easy as that (if the behavior problem is due to a student condition).

My experience is that children are screened and tested fairly thoroughly before admittance is considered. So far I’m unaware of any problems with my grandchildren at least. My eldest granddaughter is far above public school grade level in all areas  

 

And who would send a normal child to a school that caters to problems????

Edited by mrmarklin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, mrmarklin said:

OP basically described his wife as someone who was math deficient and couldn’t spell. I wouldn’t want her teaching my children, and can only feel sorry for hers.

So, mrmarklin, has any of the data I produced, or any of the personal anecdotes we've shared, had any impact in your view of homeschooling?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/8/2018 at 8:17 AM, Vort said:

 

 

On 4/8/2018 at 8:17 AM, Vort said:

I know that's a popular saying, but I know of no such scriptural injunction.

This is just an observation/comment here, and not a criticism, but I couldn't help noting how similar the above phrase is to one of Rob's favourite questions. 

On 4/8/2018 at 8:17 AM, Vort said:

I do know of scriptures that say "come ye out from Babylon"

At yet you continue to live in Seattle? :) 

On 4/8/2018 at 8:17 AM, Vort said:

you think that homeschooling takes place on another planet?

If it was HOME schooling, it would likely be done on the same planet, probably even at a particular place on that planet, in fact probably the place on that planet where the family lives. I note that the planet we are living on was built specifically and only for the purpose of our schooling. 

On 4/8/2018 at 8:17 AM, Vort said:

On the other hand, we have numerous scriptural injunctions to separate ourselves from the practices of the world and be holy

14  Ye are the light of the world.  A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.
15  Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house.
16  Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.

Homeschooling seems to have some similarities to retreating from the world and putting up the barricades. The above scripture might call for a different approach. 
 

On 4/8/2018 at 8:17 AM, Vort said:

For the life of me, I can't see how homeschooling would violate God's commandments, in any possible sense.

Me either. I don't think the decision to homeschool or not to homeschool is a violation of any commandments. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, askandanswer said:

This is just an observation/comment here, and not a criticism, but I couldn't help noting how similar the above phrase is to one of Rob's favourite questions.

I quite honestly don't know what question you're talking about. I know that Rob believes that everyone who is not damned to outer darkness for all eternity will instead receive exaltation, but beyond that, I don't know what you're referring to.

36 minutes ago, askandanswer said:
On 4/7/2018 at 3:17 PM, Vort said:

I do know of scriptures that say "come ye out from Babylon"

At yet you continue to live in Seattle? :) 

Touché. :)

The front-page headline and top half of today's Seattle Times is a story about a "family" of two "married" women and their adopted, multiracial children who (apparently intentionally) ran off a cliff in California. The article is excessively praising of this family, repeatedly signalling their liberal virtue. It does mention the many child abuse allegations against these "mothers", but the focus is clearly on what a wonderful family they were. The article continues for TWO FULL PAGES in the first section of the paper. Do you care to guess how many times the, um, nontraditional aspect (read: lesbian "parentage") of this "family" was mentioned as a possible contributing factor to its murder by one of the "mothers"? You get one guess.

Okay, done? If you guessed some number other than "zero", then you are clearly clueless as to how the Seattle Times operates. (If you guessed some number other than a nonnegative integer less than a hundred, seek help.)

What would have been the difference if this had been a traditional Mormon family of eight whose parent intentionally plunged them off a cliff to their deaths? Well, in the first place, there would not be a paean to them in the form of a front-page article two or three weeks later, certainly not one that ran on for over two full pages. In the second place, you can bet your bottom dollar that the article would have included extensive journalistic "analysis" of the family's Mormon beliefs and how such stifling patriarchy might have contributed to the deaths of the family members, painting the murdering parent either as a longsuffering, put-upon wife who finally snapped or as an enraged husband enforcing his ultimate patriarchal oppression.

It does get tiresome living here. I don't deny that. I am not sure how much longer I'm willing to put up with the idiocy and intentional obtuseness of Seattle. But this place is not without its unique benefits. I suppose I could find fault with any place; my wife and I loved Utah and, when we were first married, wanted to live there. It would have been a different life from that which we have lived, maybe even better. But from the complaints I have heard about Utah from so many who live or have lived there, I can only assume that it, too, would have been something short of Zion.

54 minutes ago, askandanswer said:

If it was HOME schooling, it would likely be done on the same planet, probably even at a particular place on that planet, in fact probably the place on that planet where the family lives. I note that the planet we are living on was built specifically and only for the purpose of our schooling. 

Apparently, my attempt at winking humor failed.

55 minutes ago, askandanswer said:
On 4/7/2018 at 3:17 PM, Vort said:

On the other hand, we have numerous scriptural injunctions to separate ourselves from the practices of the world and be holy

14  Ye are the light of the world.  A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.
15  Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house.
16  Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.

Homeschooling seems to have some similarities to retreating from the world and putting up the barricades. The above scripture might call for a different approach. 

So you think the Savior's injunction above was a call to send your young children away from home for fifty hours per week to put them in the tutelage of those who deny, and at times work against, our most cherished beliefs?

I disagree.

56 minutes ago, askandanswer said:

Me either. I don't think the decision to homeschool or not to homeschool is a violation of any commandments.

At some level, whether or not an activity is allowed or disallowed by explicit commandment becomes unimportant. Someday soon, each of us will stand before our Maker. At that time, he will not ask us how closely we abided by the cultural norms of our society. He will certainly require of us an accounting of how we discharged our duties toward our children, including the duty to see to their education. If people send their children off to public school as an attempt to get rid of them for nine hours per day and let them make more money/watch more TV/surf more internet, those people will surely, without any doubt, answer to their Creator for their choices. And their children will surely experience the consequences of their parents' choices. This is true in any case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share