Homeschooling

[1Prelude]

...Meh. I'll post a big long essay sometime later. <_<

 

First off, I fail to see how evolution ties in to anything here in particular, so I'll avoid trying to add any parallels.

Now that that is out of our way, I do have a few humble points to make regarding the subject of homeschooling.

I was homeschooled for my entire life, minus the last year, and I must attest to the effectiveness of the particular curriculum in which I was enrolled.

As I'm sure people have mentioned in previous homeschooling debate threads, (which, by the way, I have not bothered to read extensively) there are several ways to homeschool. We ordered the curriculum through ABEKA, which is based in Florida. The material included text books, teacher guides, (designed with non-teachers in mind) test books, etc. So in reality, the parents do not have to know a whole lot. The texts are laid out well enough and the problems are clear and concise. If, per chance, one does have issues on a given problem, there is phone support from ABEKA.

 

Now, I must add that not all curricula are the same, and neither are the individuals who undertake such a challenge as homeschooling. I have several homeschooled friends who would have done much better in a public school setting. Yes, I'll admit there are certainly some odd ones. On the other hand, I know even more very bright, very clever homeschooled individuals who's wit and social adeptness leave the average "public schooled" individual in the dust. In fact, this is a fact attested by many studies and surveys on the subject. Homeschooled children learn (on average) more quickly then their schooled counterparts. And, if brought up under proper parental guidance, develop far superior social skills which include comfortable interaction with individuals of all ages, as opposed to the narrow peer interaction developed by "schooled" children.

Let me restate that there are always exceptions to the rule, but what I have mentioned is based upon a general mean.

 

Having first hand experience in both forms of education, I feel qualified enough to say that there are certain advantages and disadvantages to each. Public school most certainly provides many excellent opportunities for non-academic events such as dramas, sports tournaments, and other such activities. The peer support and group dynamic of public school was also a unique experience which I much enjoyed.

Disadvantages to public school? Apart from the narrow field of social interaction which I previously mentioned, the subjects are often taught ineffectually. By that I mean that for one or two teachers to ensure proper education of all 30 students, (or however many) much more time must be spent with each individual student to help him thoroughly learn the subject. And, as I'm sure I don't need to say, it would be entirely impractical to ask a teacher to do this. The rising illiteracy rates, lowering grades, and increasing dropouts should be enough to cause any person some concern. I am not getting into the specifics of such problems, and I am not advocating the abolition of public schooling. That is also impractical and silly.

 

...*pauses, for effect*

 

Well I could go on, but I've got more interesting things to do at the moment, and I'm sure that not many here actually care to read this much as opposed to voicing his opinion. So yes, in summary, I will say that homeschooling and public schooling are very different and each unique in it's own way. Based upon my experiences and observations, homeschooling does seem to provide a better level of education to the average individual, given that the parents are able and willing to tackle such a challenge. I'm not against regular school, but it does have shortcomings.

 

Thank you all, goodbye.

[Duskrider]

Thank you, I was considering doing exactly this since LHammonds locked the other thread. While we wait for Dark0ne to ban LHammonds for that petty abuse of power in posting "this is my opinion, and I'll lock your thread if you disagree with me", we'll just move the discussion here.

 

 

I'll look over the rest of it later today, but for now, I'll explain why the evolution argument is relevant. The chain of reasoning:

 

 

1) The entire premise of homeschooling is that the parents can do a better job than a formal school. This means they actually have to do that job, and as an absolute minimum, meet the same standards as any traditional school.

 

2) Science education is a critical part of this minimum standard (just like many other subjects). If homeschooling parents are unable to provide an adequate science education, this is a failure of homeschooling.

 

3) Evolution is a critical part of modern biology. The theory's support is essentially unanimous, and backed up by evidence at the same level of confidence as the theory that bacteria cause disease. Additionally, concepts brought up in the other two threads such as "what makes an explanation a scientific theory" are even more critical to a proper understanding of science. Any "education" that lacks these concepts fails to meet the minimum standards that homeschoolers claim to be capable of.

 

4) Despite point #3, there are many people who claim to know better than the experts and oppose teaching evolution. If they are allowed to homeschool their children, the education those children recieve will have major gaps. This breaks the premise in #1, demonstrating that homeschooling is NOT able to be a complete substitute for a formal education. If they are unwilling and/or unable to do the entire job, homeschooling fails.

 

 

The core issue here is accountability. A teacher in a formal school that refused to teach evolution would be fired. A formal school that made a policy of refusing to teach evolution would be stripped of its accreditation. A homeschooling parent that refuses to teach evolution suffers no consequences, it is their children that have to pay the price.

 

 

Now, you might say I could use other examples, and this is true. For example, there is nothing preventing homeschooling parents from teaching that communism is a wonderful and perfectly functioning social system that produces a true worker's paradise, complete equality, and has worked perfectly in every country that has ever tried it. This would be a completely false distortion of history, and obviously unacceptable. The fact that homeschooling parents are not held accountable for teaching it is a major problem for homeschooling.

 

However... evolution has two factors that make it an ideal example:

 

1) As a scientific theory (and the issue here is science education and the ability of homeschooling parents to do it), evolution is unanimously accepted by the experts. This makes the question one of parents' qualifications to teach, not a legitimate disagreement about which content is correct to teach. While we could argue all day with no empirical evidence about whether the historical communist states were true communists, necessary conditions for successful communism, etc, the question of whether evolution is the correct thing to teach in science class has no room for debate. The only question is whether homeschoolers can/will teach it properly.

 

2) There is actually a significant amount of "controversy" over teaching evolution. While I could easily pick on the tinfoil hat nutcases who homeschool their children because of delusional conspiracy theories, that leaves the point open to arguments like "but who would really do something that crazy...". Unlike the tiny tinfoil hat minority, the number of potential children who will recieve a poor education is actually significant enough to worry about.

 

3) Unlike say, quantum mechanics (where, to quote the great Feynman, "if you think you understand quantum theory, you don't understand quantum theory"), evolution is actually important to getting a good education. You can't dismiss all of modern biology as some useless subject that's too trivial for anyone to care about.

 

Now, just to be clear on the "religious issue": this is a debate about secular education, NOT religion. Religion is completely irrelevant here... while I'm sure we all have opinions on the subject of teaching religion to children, they aren't relevant. Homeschooling is a replacement for the secular state education, which religion is NOT a part of. And it isn't relevant to teaching evolution either. Evolution is a scientific theory, and completely independent of religion. Many people accept the theory without compromising their religious beliefs, and there are plenty of qualified science teachers who are religious. And I'm sure there are plenty of atheists who are not qualified to teach evolution (just look at Lysenkoism for one example). So do not bring your personal religious beliefs (or lack of beliefs) into this debate, not only do they break the forum rules, but they are irrelevant to the debate.

 

And just to be clear, the purpose of this is NOT to silence debate, or troll people into saying something that will get them banned. The issue is purely one of science and education, two subjects that are permitted by the rules of this forum. The only reason I include this warning is because the first thread was locked after a poster insisted on preaching his personal religious beliefs as his argument, despite my requests not to. The thread was inevitably locked for religious debate. I PMed the moderator who locked it, and was given permission to re-post it, but told to make sure religion stays out of it and report the offending posts. So this is my attempt to do so. LHammonds, if you have any problem with this, whine to the moderator who told me to do it.

[1Prelude]

Ok, fair enough. I see where you are coming from.

Still, however, I won't respond to that because I have very strong opinions on the evolution/creationism subject and would undoubtedly cause the debate to spiral down into unprovable grounds (in which BOTH theories are)

 

However however, please don't make me go there. For the purpose of this discussion, I highly suggest we leave the topic of existence out of the equation, no matter how it may be tied in.

 

PLEEEEEEEEEEEASE!

Thank you. ;)

[Duskrider]

would undoubtedly cause the debate to spiral down into unprovable grounds (in which BOTH theories are)

 

Again, two misconceptions:

 

1) Evolution is as close to provable as any scientific theory. It's as solid a theory as the theory of gravity, or the theory that bacteria cause disease. This is backed up by vast amounts of evidence, both from the fossil record, and direct observation/experiment. Virtually every legitimate biologist accepts the theory as true (the few exceptions are just an inevitable product of the fact that, given any large enough group, you will find at least a couple nutcases).

 

2) Creationism is not a scientific theory at all. It is a religious or political belief. Since the issue is science education (a necessary part of education that homeschoolers must be capable of doing), it is not relevant.

 

 

But thank you for proving my point very nicely. You are yet another person demonstrating that the average person is either unable or unwilling to properly teach evolution and science in general. You are an excellent counter-argument to the core premise of homeschooling, that is, that any random person is just as qualified as professional teachers.

 

Do not take this as an insult, it is simply recognition of the obvious fact. Just like the fact that I am either unwilling or unable to teach english literature properly... anything I say on the subject would undoubtedly contain various mistakes that you would be entirely justified in pointing out. The difference here is that I do not make the claim that I am qualified to homeschool my children in the subject... I am quite happy to admit my lack of qualification, and leave the teaching to the professionals.

[1Prelude]

Let's also leave what could be taken as personal attacks out of the equation. Not that I mind per se, but it comes across as unprofessional and it makes for rapid thread locks.

 

Anyhow, don't let a lack of engagement fool you into calling ignorance. I do not wish to discuss evolution vs creationism right now, so I won't. Please respect that.

Another thread, another day, and I will be happy to engage in such a discussion.

 

One more thing, I have no personal bias in this, I simply look for truth as I'm sure you do as well. If someone challenges my findings I will carefully consider what they have to say. I don't try to defend anything except that which may stand on its own.

 

And that is all I will say in this thread regarding anything other than homeschooling.

[Duskrider]

Let's also leave what could be taken as personal attacks out of the equation. Not that I mind per se, but it comes across as unprofessional and it makes for rapid thread locks.

 

It's not a personal attack. I did edit that post to add a better explanation, so maybe you just missed it. To clarify:

 

Your statements show you are unqualified to teach science.

 

Any statement I could make about english literature would show that I am unqualified to teach it.

 

We are no different in our lack of qualifications, we just lack them in different areas. What it does do is undermine the core premise of homeschooling, the claim that any random person is just as qualified as a professional teacher. This means being qualified in every area, all it takes is one failure to break the homeschooler's claim. I simply recognize the inevitable... we are not qualified, and I leave the teaching to the experts.

 

Anyhow, don't let a lack of engagement fool you into calling ignorance. I do not wish to discuss evolution vs creationism right now, so I won't. Please respect that.

Another thread, another day, and I will be happy to engage in such a discussion.

 

I'm not calling ignorance (your word, not mine) because of your refusal to debate the subject, the short sentence you wrote says all I need to know to make my point. You very clearly show that you do not understand evolution at the level that is necessary to be a qualified science teacher. If you did, you would know why evolution is the only legitimate theory to teach. If you understood the basic concepts of the scientific method well enough to teach them, you would understand why your comment about "evolution is not provable" makes no sense, and why refering to both evolution and creationism as scientific theories is wrong.

 

 

So postpone the debate all you want, I don't even need to have it. I have all I need to show that you, as a good example of the average person, are not a qualified science teacher, and therefore the premise of homeschooling fails.

 

This one area is all I need. Unlike a regular school, where you have teachers that specialize in different subjects, homeschooling parents have to be qualified to teach every subject. If the average person has even one area where they are not qualified, they can not meet the same standards as a regular school.

[1Prelude]

The premise of homeschooling isn't based upon teaching one opinion over another, but instead educating the child in ways so as to help him think for himself. By all means, present the facts which form the basis for any philosophy (I am not referring to evolution or creationism, here) and let him draw a conclusion for himself.

I have no doubt that many parents dogmatically teach their children that creationism/evolution is the only way. This is wrong either way. As any real thinker will tell you, you must carefully and dispassionately consider each side of a debate without bias before thinking about reaching a conclusion. It's not wrong to teach about an incorrect philosophy, but it is wrong to present something as fact which many people, regardless of avenue of education, believe is not. (Again, not a specific reference to evolution, but instead a general concept)

 

Unfortunately, one finds that not many can discuss a subject dispassionately or without some sort of bias, teachers no exception. Every teacher will assert his or her opinion to some degree, and I have met very both strong supporters of evolution and creationism, each of who I consider to be a well meaning, articulate individual.

To put a little parallel spin on it, I liken it to a vehicle. There are plenty of accidents, but one should not blame the car. Instead, you should examine the person behind the wheel and inquire the reason of the accident. Don't look at homeschooling--or anything else for that matter--and insist that because there is room for error, the method itself must be wrong. That is logically unsound.

[1Prelude]

Also, I suggest you read my topic post, as perhaps it may provide insight into the whole parent bit.

[Duskrider]

To answer the rest of your points: the key issue here is accountability.

 

Pretty much any form of education, homeschooling, public schools, private schools, whatever, can do the job when things go right. Yes, you have a lot of material available to help you, you can spend more time per student, and all that. The key difference:

 

1) With traditional schools, these things are mandatory, and teachers/administration are held accountable for them. If you refuse to use the available textbooks/curriculum/etc as a traditional teacher, you will be fired. If you try to overrule the experts and teach your personal opinions (like with evolution), you will be fired. If the administration does these things, they will be out of a job when the next election arrives. To even become a teacher in the first place, you need a college degree in education, real-world experience as a student-teacher, and a teaching license (like an engineering or medical license).

 

2) With homeschooling, these things are optional. If the parents refuse to use the available textbooks/curriculum/etc and are unable to replace it with their own substitute (very few people could do this), only their children suffer. If the parents overrult the experts and teach personal opinion instead, only their children suffer. To homeschool your children, there are no standards to meet, no licenses to get. All you have to do is decide you want to do it.

 

 

This lack of accountability is the problem. As you (and many other people) have demonstrated with the point about teaching evolution, very few people are actually qualified to do the job as well as a professional teacher. But there is nothing to hold them accountable for that failure. When dealing with a world in which a solid education is becoming more and more mandatory (even low-end jobs are starting to require a university degree), a failed homeschooling job is a serious liability for the children.

[Duskrider]

The premise of homeschooling isn't based upon teaching one opinion over another, but instead educating the child in ways so as to help him think for himself. By all means, present the facts which form the basis for any philosophy (I am not referring to evolution or creationism, here) and let him draw a conclusion for himself.

 

You completely misunderstand what I am refering to as the "premise of homeschooling". Homeschooling supporters argue that the average person (the people doing the homeschooling) is just as capable of giving a complete general education as the professional teachers in a traditional school. This claim is severly undermined by the fact (which you and plenty of other people demonstrate) that the average person is not an expert in all areas.

 

If you want to do the job of the traditional school, you need to be willing and capable of doing the entire job.

 

 

I have no doubt that many parents dogmatically teach their children that creationism/evolution is the only way.

 

Again, the fact that you label it as "dogma" demonstrates that you are not a qualified science teacher. Presenting evolution as the "only way" to do biology is no different than presenting "2+2=4" as "the only way" to do math.

 

This is wrong either way. As any real thinker will tell you, you must carefully and dispassionately consider each side of a debate without bias before thinking about reaching a conclusion.

 

This may be true, once you have your general education. The simple fact is children do not have the supporting knowledge necessary to make an informed decision between evolution and creationism (or about any scientific theory, really). That's the whole point of teaching it to them!

 

This is the equivalent of saying that I should carefully and dispassionately consider each side of the debate over the theory of newtonian mechanics.... even though I do not understand the calculus required understand what I am deciding about. This is a hypothetical scenario of course... not only do I understand the calculus behind newtonian mechanics, I understand why they are fundamentally wrong, and why they are still useful anyway. But I made that decision after learning newtonian mechanics as taught by a professional teacher as the only acceptable answer... only after I got into advanced math and physics was I qualified to make a decision on the subject for myself.

 

It's not wrong to teach about an incorrect philosophy, but it is wrong to present something as fact which many people, regardless of avenue of education, believe is not. (Again, not a specific reference to evolution, but instead a general concept)

 

This is entirely wrong. The only people who have an opinion that matters are the experts in the field. Just because people who don't have the knowledge necessary to make an informed decision disagree does not mean you have to teach their beliefs as well.

 

To put a little parallel spin on it, I liken it to a vehicle. There are plenty of accidents, but one should not blame the car. Instead, you should examine the person behind the wheel and inquire the reason of the accident. Don't look at homeschooling--or anything else for that matter--and insist that because there is room for error, the method itself must be wrong. That is logically unsound.

 

 

Again, the difference is accountability. Both homeschoolers and traditional teachers can screw up. The difference is one has a clear system of accountability to remove the mistake and prevent future ones, while one does not. If you add accountability to homeschooling, you defeat the entire purpose of it, and just end up with traditional schools with a different name.