The Constitution: I can't think of a better argument for Homeschool


Guest Mores
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, unixknight said:

We aren't talking about teaching the Gospel though.  We're talking about public school vs. homeschool. 

We're not talking about teaching the Gospel or teaching Math.  We're talking about PURPOSE.  You can use any purpose as an example.  

Like so:  Purpose:  For my kids to be proficient in Math so he can do basic home economics (which is different from For my kids to be proficient in Math so he can become an Engineer).

So - to achieve that purpose, you need a teacher.  Who is the best one that can achieve the Purpose?  In my case, it's not me.  With my temper, I'd end up strangling my kids before they gain proficiency.  So, it has to be a professional teacher.  Sending my kids to Public School may not achieve that purpose (in my case it did, but it's not true for others) so, I have to pay for that teacher.  So, I need $X amount to do so.  So my time and attention is better spent finding $X than teaching my kids Math.

But let's say finding $X means I have to spend 10 hours everyday away from my kids.  Now there are other Purposes that may go down the wayside because I decided to spend 10 hours everyday somewhere else.  For example, now I am only left with 6 hours everyday to fulfill other purposes - like checking up on whether my kids Math instruction is up to par, or my other purpose of feeding my kids proper nutrition, or my other purpose of establishing traditions for my kid's stability, or my other purpose of teaching the gospel, etc. etc.  All those purposes have to compete for the rest of the 6 hours.  If the Purpose is not accomplished, then we'll have to rethink whether finding money to pay the Math teacher was worth it.

 

 

Just now, unixknight said:

So is a screwdriver, but no matter what my purpose is, I can't remove a screw without one.

Yes you can.  There are many ways you can remove a screw without a screwdriver if it needed to be removed in the first place.  You can use a butter knife, a coin, a credit card, or you can smash the thing the screw was buried in an take out the screw.  Some ways are easier (and inflict lesser damage) than others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Yes you can.  There are many ways you can remove a screw without a screwdriver if it needed to be removed in the first place.  You can use a butter knife, a coin, a credit card, or you can smash the thing the screw was buried in an take out the screw.  Some ways are easier (and inflict lesser damage) than others.

Well, that's kinda beside the point.  Most of those examples are still just using something else as a screwdriver.  My point here is that sometimes no matter where your priorities are,  you have to have a tool that accomplished the purpose, and getting it sometimes involves sacrifice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mores
17 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

Historically...  Clearly enough for Public Schooling to be seen as a possible solutions...   If you want to ignore how it was the failure of enough of the Parents in the first place that made Public Schooling even possible there is nothing I can to to counter willful ignorance. 

No, it's not willful ignorance.  I believe I see a bigger picture.

1) What was considered "illiterate" back then was a wide range from "couldn't even tell the difference between one letter and another" to "can read words and sentences just fine but only read short paragraphs at a time.  About half of that is what we would call "literate" today.

2) They had a larger vocabulary.  I'd challenge people like AOC who purportedly has a degree in economics to be able to define all the words in The McGuffy Reader (a 6th grade book).  And this is considered literate.

3) They simply read a whole lot more than we do today.  We've got movies and television.  We simply don't read as much.  But that is considered normal.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mores
1 hour ago, unixknight said:

No, I meant I don't think you were being fair in your argument.  I agree that generally people put most of their energies into that which they most value... but that assumes they have the choice to do so.

No, it doesn't.  I already made the exception for those who TRULY have no choice.  They MUST do what they must do.  But all too often people simply believe they have no choice when they really do.  Can I make that judgment for other people without knowing anything about them?  Of course not.  But as a whole, I've personally seen people making decisions to lose a house to keep a $100k sports car.  I've seen people living on $100k/yr+ decide they need additional hours at work when plenty of families have many children and get by on $50k/yr in a similar area.

While I try not to judge, it is difficult to ignore certain numbers that would tell me otherwise.

Quote

Well there's a difference between counsel and commandment.  When it's a commandment, you just do it.  When it's counsel, it's reliable advice from someone who understands everybody's circumstances aren't the same.

That's a reasonable approach. But again, it is too often used as an excuse rather than a real reason.  I'm not saying that is true of you because I don't know your circumstances or anyone else you can probably think of.  But I can speak to multiple families that I have been very well acquainted with who use it as an excuse.  This is anecdotal, and I never claimed otherwise.  But my personal experience has seen more excuses than reasons.

Edited by Mores
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, unixknight said:

Well, that's kinda beside the point.  Most of those examples are still just using something else as a screwdriver.  My point here is that sometimes no matter where your priorities are,  you have to have a tool that accomplished the purpose, and getting it sometimes involves sacrifice.

Yes.  Some tools are better than others.  Money is just one of a myriad of choices.  If that quest for Money is going to cause you to sacrifice other Purposes, then you're going to have to weigh whether it is better to use another tool that doesn't involve that specific quest for Money or doesn't involve Money at all which could also mean sacrifice.  So basically, you could end up sacrificing something else for another.  That's why the focus is on the Purpose.  What are you Sacrificing and is it worth it?

Edited by anatess2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mores

Now, can I get it back to the original topic?

Homeschooled children will tend to have a greater understanding and respect for the Constitution than public schooled kids.  Compare apples to apples.  Best to best, worst to worst, average to average.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Mores said:

No, it's not willful ignorance.  I believe I see a bigger picture.

Then expand your view by spending a day in family court room.

A simple fact is we have too many dysfunctional families.  As sad as that fact is, it means for some kids public school is better then their home life.  And it might be their best chance to get out. If you remove public schools what is your plan for all those kids?

If you are a concerned and active parent I can totally see viewing Public School as a huge mess. (I have that view point myself).  But if you're one of the many kids who see going to Public School as the best thing happening in their life homeschooling is the wrong answer because it compounds where the problem is for that child.

All the hype about Homeschooling is founded on the basic assumption that parents care about their kids... And sadly for way to many kids that is simply false. Until this is addressed any other answer just shifts the problem

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mores
Just now, estradling75 said:

Then expand your view by spending a day in family court room.

A simple fact is we have too many dysfunctional families.  As sad as that fact is, it means for some kids public school is better then their home life.  And it might be their best chance to get out. If you remove public schools what is your plan for all those kids?

And you believe a great majority of them are homeschoolers, do you?

Just now, estradling75 said:

If you are a concerned and active parent I can totally see viewing Public School as a huge mess. (I have that view point myself).  But if you're one of the many kids who see going to Public School as the best thing happening in their life homeschooling is the wrong answer because it compounds where the problem is for that child.

All the hype about Homeschooling is founded on the basic assumption that parents care about their kids... And sadly for way to many kids that is simply false. Until this is addressed any other answer just shifts the problem

I don't believe that simply abolishing the public school system overnight would be a solution.  The current societal condition came about over many many generations of removing parental responsibility and giving it to the state.  You can't solve that by flipping a switch.  I never advocated that.

But by encouraging the homeschool movement to grow over the course of several generations and gradually reducing the emphasis on public schools while opening up other avenues of private industry is going to improve family cohesiveness and decrease disfunctionality over the long run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mores said:

Now, can I get it back to the original topic?

Homeschooled children will tend to have a greater understanding and respect for the Constitution than public schooled kids.  Compare apples to apples.  Best to best, worst to worst, average to average.

 

2 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

Then expand your view by spending a day in family court room.

A simple fact is we have too many dysfunctional families.  As sad as that fact is, it means for some kids public school is better then their home life.  And it might be their best chance to get out. If you remove public schools what is your plan for all those kids?

If you are a concerned and active parent I can totally see viewing Public School as a huge mess. (I have that view point myself).  But if you're one of the many kids who see going to Public School as the best thing happening in their life homeschooling is the wrong answer because it compounds where the problem is for that child.

All the hype about Homeschooling is founded on the basic assumption that parents care about their kids... And sadly for way to many kids that is simply false. Until this is addressed any other answer just shifts the problem

I'd agree with estradling.

In a varied version of it, I think that the reason you see some Homeschooled Children gain a greater understanding (not necessarily respect) of the Constitution is due to the TYPE of parent that homeschools their children.  They tend to be more involved and active in their child's life.

If you take a bunch of parents that are not involved and not all that active in their child's life and try to have them homeschool I think all that would be accomplished would be a bunch of uneducated children that were worse off than they were going to public schools.

Some Public Schools are excellent in educating and others are not as stellar.  In either case, a lot of it has to do with parental involvement in either situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mores said:

And you believe a great majority of them are homeschoolers, do you?

 

WHAT?!?!  Where in any of my post to you get the assumption that I have anything but respect for those that make the sacrifice for homeschooling?  Please quit monster painting me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Mores said:

Now, can I get it back to the original topic?

Homeschooled children will tend to have a greater understanding and respect for the Constitution than public schooled kids.  Compare apples to apples.  Best to best, worst to worst, average to average.

Hype again.

Fact...  A child engaged by a teacher teaching the Constitution and respect for it. Will tend to have such. Then a child not engaged or not taught.

Assumption Granted... That Homeschooler will most likely have higher levels of engaged for reasons priory outlined.

Assumption iffy... That such will be taught.    It depends on the individualized teaching plan and the strength of the teacher (in homeschooling and public schooling)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mores said:

Homeschooled children will tend to have a greater understanding and respect for the Constitution than public schooled kids.  Compare apples to apples.  Best to best, worst to worst, average to average.

Best: homeschooled best > public schooled best, though both will be good products.

Worst: homeschooled worst < public school worst (probably). Even the worst public schools have some sort of oversight somewhere. A completely disinvolved parent "homeschooling" his/her child is an unfolding disaster of epic proportions.

Average: homeschooled average > public schooled average. This is borne out by numerous studies. I suspect the gap is as large as it is because homeschoolers self-select and are therefore heavily biased toward parents who want to be intimately involved with their children's education, a situation that will always result in better students. But I also suspect that a home learning environment will generally produce better results than a more formal, traditional school environment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, estradling75 said:

A simple fact is we have too many dysfunctional families.  As sad as that fact is, it means for some kids public school is better then their home life.  And it might be their best chance to get out. If you remove public schools what is your plan for all those kids?

For my part, I am not an advocate for removing public schools. Rather, I'm an advocate for supporting (and maybe even encouraging) homeschooling.

I think of it this way: Educating my child is my God-given duty and right. If the state offers a public schooling option, I may avail myself of it (especially if it's funded by mandatory public taxes instead of opt-in—in other words, if it's done the way it is currently done everywhere). I may also avail myself of the services of a private school. But in all cases, I have the option to teach my children at home, and to do so uniquely, if I choose.

The overwhelming majority of neglectful, abusive parents will not care to have their little monsters underfoot all day, so they'll go the public school route. The rest should have not merely the option of homeschooling, but the active support of their society, government included.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Vort said:

For my part, I am not an advocate for removing public schools. Rather, I'm an advocate for supporting (and maybe even encouraging) homeschooling.

I think of it this way: Educating my child is my God-given duty and right. If the state offers a public schooling option, I may avail myself of it (especially if it's funded by mandatory public taxes instead of opt-in—in other words, if it's done the way it is currently done everywhere). I may also avail myself of the services of a private school. But in all cases, I have the option to teach my children at home, and to do so uniquely, if I choose.

The overwhelming majority of neglectful, abusive parents will not care to have their little monsters underfoot all day, so they'll go the public school route. The rest should have not merely the option of homeschooling, but the active support of their society, government included.

Indeed I have no problem with any of this.

My wife and I tried home schooling.  I work full time and it turned out that my wife really did not have the temperament for it.  Realizing that was not working we changed tactic.  Knowing that we were paying for public school any ways we picked schools in communities that largely shared our beliefs (Moving to Utah made that easier) then instead of pulling out of the Public Schools we pushed into them.  I do not think there are very many of any of the facility of my kids schools who would not recognize my wife on sight, she is there so much and directly involved in so much of the schools activities.  And that does not account for the stuff we do when I get home.

Yet to a lot of homeschooler Evangelists declare because my kids are public schooled I am a horrible parent and my kids are doomed to failures.  Heh...  My oldest is now in college.  All expenses paid for by academic scholarships.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Vort said:

Many and perhaps most public school teachers are simply not people you would want to raise your children. 

I started to reply in mock offense, because I like to imagine Vort thinks I am a half-decent parent despite me being a public school teacher.

But then I thought about an epiphany I had the other month at a teacher training. The presenter was going on and on about how we of the teaching breed care so much about kids and go to great lengths to care for them and how we went into the career to change lives...

It was rather awkward for me. I went into teaching because I thought sifting through various subjects and presenting them would be fun and I would get summers off. I happen to have a high tolerance and even like for kids, but a deep love and extreme concern for their well-being wasn't that high on the radar as apparently it maybe should be.

So does this mean you want me raising your kids? Since I figure you (the general you of the general public and no one specific here) are the parent, it's your job to raise your kids. I am more than happy to help provide an educational setting for them, but I'm not a big coddler. Which may be considered sad as I teach 1st grade, but there it is. I frankly hate the idea of being the substitute parent. That's the parents' job. 

Once upon a time I saw a debate over the pros and cons of school recess (for the off-topic record, I'm pro-recess). A gentleman brought up an idea for scrapping recess altogether. But not in the name of test scores or anything. He figured that by scrapping recess and cutting the school day down to a few essentials (think the classic rs), the school day could be a matter of a few hours and the kids would be sent home to their families--where they would have the playtime and further education and whatever else a family might have. I am not opposed to such a model. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Backroads said:

I started to reply in mock offense, because I like to imagine Vort thinks I am a half-decent parent despite me being a public school teacher.

I speak as one with many public school teacher family members, including my wonderful daughter-in-law. I am painting with a broad brush that does not fit many individuals, but most of the public school teachers I know and admire actually agree that many teachers are bozos. I had my share of very good public school teachers, and perhaps more than my share of the other kind.

Tsar-Bomb.jpg

Remember me?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

In relevant comparison, we have the Articles of Faith as one of our standard ideas to express what we believe.  How many of us can quote them completely?  I am certain some can, but most Members would not be able to do so.  Many may get confused as to which Article of Faith is which number.  Add in the Ten Commandments (which is the 7th and which is the 9th commandment as a question), and then add in the Beatitudes and you'll probably find that even a majority of religion teachers (Seminary teachers, CES educators) and even more so in relation to Church leaders (Bishops, Stake Presidents, and even Seventies) cannot give you the exact answer to one of these without at least a little review before hand.

And here we have an excellent example of dedicating learning time to things that don't matter; if the Articles were randomly renumbered, would it impact the way one lives them in the slightest?  It's right up there with spending more time memorizing dates than gaining a deeper understanding the significance of what happened on those dates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Mores said:

Now, can I get it back to the original topic?

Homeschooled children will tend to have a greater understanding and respect for the Constitution than public schooled kids.  Compare apples to apples.  Best to best, worst to worst, average to average.

That's not apples to apples.  Because it's not the method of teaching that is the correlation.  Parental Involvement or Student Aptitude is.  Therefore, saying it is Homeschooling that tends to produce Constitutionally respectful kids is tantamount to Fake News.  The Headline Correction would be:  "Children with Parents Involved in their Education tend to have a greater understanding and respect for the Constitution than those who don't".  But even then, unless I see statistics, I'm not quite sure that is correct.  Because, there are a lot of parents who don't understand nor respect the Constitution and I'm going to posit they litter both Parental-involved education in Public School and Home School.

 

Edited by anatess2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mores
15 hours ago, Vort said:

Worst: homeschooled worst < public school worst (probably). Even the worst public schools have some sort of oversight somewhere. A completely disinvolved parent "homeschooling" his/her child is an unfolding disaster of epic proportions.

The schools themselves, maybe.  But the "worst" public schooled children are not any better off than a completely neglected homeschooled student.  Remember that the worst are the ones who ditch school and are involved with gangs.  They only use school to connect with other gang members.

And as far as oversight, I submitted the standarized testing as an appropriate measure against such neglect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mores
5 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

That's not apples to apples.  Because it's not the method of teaching that is the correlation.  Parental Involvement or Student Aptitude is.

You don't realize it, but you're talking in circles.  

YES, you CAN have involved parents who are involved with their children in public schools.  You're absolutely right. I do not deny that.

MY POINT is that the SYSTEM of public school is such that it ENCOURAGES parents to be less involved.  Have that in a society for 10 generations and you have an epidemic of parents who don't believe it is their duty to train and educate their children.  In short, they don't raise their children.

MY POINT is that the parents who don't raise their children are ENCOURAGED to behave this way because of the public school system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mores said:

The schools themselves, maybe.  But the "worst" public schooled children are not any better off than a completely neglected homeschooled student.  Remember that the worst are the ones who ditch school and are involved with gangs.  They only use school to connect with other gang members. 

I'd assume the opposite also, right?  That the worst Home Schooled child is not better off than the worst Public Schooled kid?  I don't know how it is in other States but in Florida, the Home School is part of Public School.  The parents report to the School Board and their records kept.  They can even join Public School sports.  So regardless of whether a kid is in Public School or Home School, the level of oversight would be the same - The School Board and the neglectful parent are all on the hook on the record.

Your example about kids who only attend school for gangs is not possible in Florida.  They'd be kicked out of Public School and sent to either Charter or one of the levels of Juvie.

 

1 minute ago, Mores said:

And as far as oversight, I submitted the standarized testing as an appropriate measure against such neglect.

Standardized Testing is one thing I hate about Public School.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Mores said:

You don't realize it, but you're talking in circles.  

YES, you CAN have involved parents who are involved with their children in public schools.  You're absolutely right. I do not deny that.

MY POINT is that the SYSTEM of public school is such that it ENCOURAGES parents to be less involved.  Have that in a society for 10 generations and you have an epidemic of parents who don't believe it is their duty to train and educate their children.  In short, they don't raise their children.

MY POINT is that the parents who don't raise their children are ENCOURAGED to behave this way because of the public school system.

I disagree.

It is not the Public School System that does this nor encourage this.  It is CULTURE that does.  And it is not the Public School System that created that Culture.  It is the Modern Feminist Movement.  Proof - the difference in Public School Education between Washington State and Florida.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, anatess2 said:

It is not the Public School System that does this nor encourage this.  It is CULTURE that does.

You have made many good points, anatess, but I have to disagree very strongly with you here. The public schools institutionally promote themselves over all other alternatives. There can be no argument on that point. The teachers' unions unabashedly denigrate homeschooling to keep jobs for their union members. Not just homeschooling, but direct parental involvement in the child's education outside the limited roles that the school has determined parents ought to play. For the vast majority of school administrators and teachers, what children learn at home is the problem with the child, the bad issue they're seeking to resolve.

Public schools are not now and probably never have been primarily concerned about educating the children. That's their raison d'être, certainly; but where the rubber meets the road, it is not Concern #1, or even Concern #2. To say that public schools don't historically (and today) encourage parental disinvolvement in student education is naive in the extreme. Even today, when "parental involvement" is the buzzword in public education, you can be sure that the schools want only a certain type of parental involvement, and that any involvement outside that narrow band is unwelcome and almost certainly prohibited on school grounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My closest friend in the world is a teacher in a public high school, and the stories he tells about the way things are done in that county will raise the hairs on the back of your neck, and this isn't an impoverished or low income area of the state.  The problems have to do with corruption, backside covering, and manipulating statistical data to make the county schools' performance appear much better than it is.  He often tells me the county where I live is much better and that my kids are way better off here than in his county.  The sad fact is that he lives in that county and our houses are only about 20 minutes apart.  The difference?

My county covers a rather more conservative region of Maryland, while his is one of the most liberal.  Correlation =/= causation, but still...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Mores said:

No, it doesn't.  I already made the exception for those who TRULY have no choice.  They MUST do what they must do.  But all too often people simply believe they have no choice when they really do.  Can I make that judgment for other people without knowing anything about them?  Of course not.  But as a whole, I've personally seen people making decisions to lose a house to keep a $100k sports car.  I've seen people living on $100k/yr+ decide they need additional hours at work when plenty of families have many children and get by on $50k/yr in a similar area.

While I try not to judge, it is difficult to ignore certain numbers that would tell me otherwise.

That's a reasonable approach. But again, it is too often used as an excuse rather than a real reason.  I'm not saying that is true of you because I don't know your circumstances or anyone else you can probably think of.  But I can speak to multiple families that I have been very well acquainted with who use it as an excuse.  This is anecdotal, and I never claimed otherwise.  But my personal experience has seen more excuses than reasons.

I get where you're coming from and I think you get where I'm coming from, so I think we're good here.

Additional note:  I do agree that people often use that as an excuse.  It's one of the  things that makes it hard to defend certain points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • pam featured this topic
  • pam unfeatured this topic

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