Homeschooling

[freddycashmercury]

Sure thing, Dusk!

 

 

Here's one: http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000010/200410250.asp

 

Here's another: http://www.hslda.org/docs/study/rudner1999/Rudner2.asp

 

They might be the same study, I'm not too sure.

[freddycashmercury]

The study was voluntary, as far as I know the students were randomly picked, and the students are required to take these tests if they intend to pursue higher education.

[ResidentWeevil2077]

Here's a study conducted in 2003 by Dr. Brian D. Ray, president of the National Home Education Research Institute, commissioned by the HSLDA (Home School Legal Defense Association)

 

http://www.hslda.org/research/ray2003/Home...lingGrowsUp.pdf

 

Here's a different study that doesn't support homeschooling with the point of students are not obligated to take standardized tests:

 

http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000010/200410250.asp

 

EDIT: I see freddycashmercury already has posted the second study - disregard

[Guest]

If so, what ramifications should this be having on my life?

 

 

1) You are utterly ignorant of a major aspect of our modern understanding of the world. I would say that knowledge for its own sake is a good thing... I can't understand why anyone would not want to know the answer to this kind of question.

 

2) If you had any plans of going into any career related to biology, or really, science in general, you are laughably unqualified. Now, this may be an acceptable loss, if you are an adult (you don't have your age listed), but you do not have the right to make that decision for your children.

 

 

Okay, so now that I'm finally back from class... (and I apologize for going so far back in the thread.... but you guys moved quickly while I was gone....)

 

I understand what you're saying. However, despite being taught from an early age that Creationism is true and evolution is false, it has not affected my education negatively at all. I am currently majoring in Biology at my university, have perfectly good grades, and yet still believe that Creationism is true. Now, a biology degree is not the end of my education, I plan to go to Veterinary school in the end, but I really don't see where my education has failed me.

 

I've done quite well in all my classes here at the university. Especially in the biology centered ones. I most certainly don't go to a school that teaches Creationism. But honestly, I was on the exact same level as most of my fellow students in my general biology class. The only difference was that I was homeschooled and they were public schooled.

 

If my highschool science education was such a miserable failure because it taught Creationism and not Evolution, why am I doing just find in college biology courses? At this point, as you might have noticed, I'm not really making any arguments at all. I'm really just honestly curious...because according to you my science education was a failure, but I really don't see how it's affected me negatively.

 

Am I the exception to your rule?

[Duskrider]

What you show is that it's possible to counter bad education if you spend enough extra effort on catching up. The point is you shouldn't have to do this, if you're in this situation your education system has already screwed up.

 

 

Of course a little lack of intellectual honesty doesn't hurt things either. Since evolution and creationism are completely contradictory concepts (creationism explicitly says that evolution is false), we can conclude one of three things:

 

1) You believe in creationism, and are lying your way through school. You know perfectly well that the answers you are giving on exams and stuff are not what you really believe, but you do it anyway. And I know you aren't openly giving creationist answers on your assignments and exams, because if you did, you would be failing those classes.

 

2) You accept evolution, and are lying to yourself when you say you believe in creationism (probably because you don't want to think your past beliefs are a waste?).

 

3) You are wrong when you say you actually understand the material. You really don't, so you just don't realize that your two claimed beliefs fundamentally conflict.

[Vagrant0]

How did I miss this little jem. At any rate, I did not real most of the thread, but I'm sure that's understandable since I went to a public school so am obviously illliterate or incapable of grasping the "finer" concepts of being home schooled. I was also one of those kids who was constantly bullied, picked on, and both socially tortured and exiled (often in the same day)... In the days before anything was really done about it. So um... I have seen the worst that public school has to offer your typical person who happens to have parents who have the option of home schooling (let's be realistic, not everyone can afford to teach their children). That said, I do not see the benefits of homeschooling in the greater context of society. The first reason is the one I already eluded to, for many people, it is simply not an option due to financial reasons. One parent would afterall have to stay home durring the day to teach, or would have to be earning enough money to hire a teacher. Oddly enough, those children who tend to test the lowest, and actually remain illiterate to the point of stupidity tend to be among that group. There is a significant difference between some whiney kid living in the suburbs who decides he "doesn't like school, so won't even try" and those kids living in the city who are sitting in overcrowded schools, reading texts that are redicuously out of date, being taught by teachers who live in constant fear and frustration of their own situation. The issue is not how homeschooling is such a great and powerful thing... The issue is how poorly managed many schools are and how students are taught (atleast socially) not to learn.

 

Afterall much of what kids learn socially comes not from interaction, but what the media is feeding them. Since idolization of idiocy and disrespect have been the constant theme for the last 12 years or so, this is what many kids have been saturated with their whole lives. There are no more good role models. Nearly everyone that is famous is either on drugs, is a pervert, is an idiot, or a combination of those. Nevermind the Michael Jordan / Nike campaign which misled many youths into thinking that they could ever play basketball and similar things in the past which exploited the few good role models to sell products or ideas (which may be why many of the younger working force are virtually skilless having eventually come to terms with reality).

 

It isn't merely a school thing, it's a social thing. Children, who start off with an innate drive to learn tend to get it killed off by both society and the school system. Much of the reason why kids start to fail is because they are either left without challenge (while the slower students try to catch up) or are frustrated (because they are the slower students). I will agree with this much, Home schooling does solve this to some extent since it is done at an individual pace, rather than a group pace. But this problem wouldn't be nearly as bad as it is now if there wasn't such a large gap between the two groups, and conflict wasn't allowed to develop between the two groups... There are two things which children tend to enjoy, learning new things, and sharind what they have learned with others (this later part usually gets killed off early by parents who get sick of the behavior). It is no supprize that if students are put in an environment where cooperation is encouraged, both groups tend to do better. Going back to the social issues, a cooperative environment can also diminish the chances that certain students will be picked on because there is not this need to establish a heirarchy.

 

The second reason is rather simple. Although there are some parents who are psychologically capable, and socially responsible enough to teach their children things which will put the child in a better position in life, there are however many parents who are unfit for that duty. Such unfit parents do not use homeschooling as a means of fulfilling the child, but rather use it to instill their own beliefs in the child. Unfortunately this seems to be the reasoning many parents seem to use. They disagree with what is being taught in schools, so decide to force what they do agree with on their child. In those cases, curriculum is superceded by whatever governing philosophy the parents are most adamant about. One example of this was seen on an episode of tradins spouses... While probably not typical, shows a clear example of how severely twisted a household can become when one philosophy is made the only philosophy. Although I havn't looked into it, I wouldn't be suprised to see if some of these companies who are supplying teaching materials actually cater to this brand of teaching. Regardless with what you feel about the philosophy, the fact that it wasn't taught equally along side others makes this so wholely wrong. More over, many states do not have clear guidelines that parents who wish to homeschool their kids have to follow, making this sort of issue easier to occur, and remain constant for many years. Screwed up parents - Screwed up kids. Since there is no evaluation required to become a homeschool parent, or if there is, it is so non-specific so as to not offend people, any wacko with the ability to meet those requirements can have their kid pulled out of school and taught in "their" way.

 

Even if only a handful of the parents doing this are teaching unsound philosophies to their children, that is more than enough reason why there is a problem with home schooling. The difference between kid with wacko parents going to public school and kid with wacko parents teaching the kid is that however bad public school is, they HAVE to teach subjects which have some degree of objectivity. That can often make enough difference to give the kid atleast some chance of turning out normal. It only takes one crazy to start a cult or to bomb a hopsital because they believe modern medicine is the work of the devil.

[Guest]

But I haven't done any extra work at all to catch up. That's what I'm saying, when I got to my general biology class...we were all on the same level.

 

1) You believe in creationism, and are lying your way through school. You know perfectly well that the answers you are giving on exams and stuff are not what you really believe, but you do it anyway. And I know you aren't openly giving creationist answers on your assignments and exams, because if you did, you would be failing those classes.

 

I actually lean a little more towards intelligent design(the modern intelligent design theory, mind you). I am not, however, lying my way through school. Biology classes have surprisingly little class time devoted to evolution. Even right now in my upper level biology classes we hardly talk about evolution at all. Occasionally my teachers will mention something and say "this seems to be evidence for what we think happened."

 

To be honest, I haven't fully decided. As a religious person I believe in a higher power(intelligent designer...what have you), but I won't completely discount evolution. It's possible that the two theories are compatible (though one could argue that that would make a designer slightly superfluous....) But I assure you that I am not lying my way through school.

 

2) You accept evolution, and are lying to yourself when you say you believe in creationism (probably because you don't want to think your past beliefs are a waste?).

 

This would make sense...but no, it's not the case.

 

3) You are wrong when you say you actually understand the material. You really don't, so you just don't realize that your two claimed beliefs fundamentally conflict.

 

And goodness no, I don't understand all of the material. My classes are pretty specific these days...we get into complicated things. But honestly, we discuss evolution in my philosophy class more than we do in any of my biology classes.

[Vagrant0]

How did this thread degrade to some evolution argument? Let me make it simple. Take a 500 page novel. Seperate the last 40 pages and set them aside for later. Now take the remaining 460 pages and pull out 20 of them randomly from various points within the book, burn the remaining pages. Now combine those 20 pages with the 40 pages you set aside before. Now randomly among these, pull out 10 random pages, and tear off any page indications. Now bind the 60 pages into a single document, in the order which seems to make the most sense.

 

Now here is the difference between the students of evolution, the students of intelligent design, and the followers of creationism.

 

Evolutionists take a look at the whole book as it appears to be, and makes educated guesses based on what is presented in what they have to fill in most their gaps.

 

Students of Intelligent design look at the book, but assume that what is missing never exist, and no gaps need to be filled. Instances which were presented in a discontinous state are treated seperate from instances which are continuous.

 

Followers of Creationism take a look at the book, discard the 20 pages that don't seem to fit, and insist that the document only had 40 pages, and everything else is entierly unrelated.

 

It is easy to accept a working product as a thing of impossible complexity when little to no accurate record exists of all the mistakes that were made along the way, and when there are no instructions that every aspect of that thing. I am not suggesting that God doesn't exist, or that God isn't prefect, or anything of the sort. I am just saying that we assume that perfection to be in direct relation to us, rather than perfection in the principles which have guided us into being. I may even be willing to go so far as to state that we may not be the product of those forces more than we might just be a side effect of them, and our silly human pride is really more important than any factual truth.

 

And to suggest that any one of the three has the whole story is a mistake, although the Creationists may have a document which is continuous, there is certainly proof that there is more to the story than they are willing to accept. It is also small minded to criticize anyone, while believing your own views are true when there is not enough evidence to prove that truth. So enough about the whole evolution thing... Ok... While Creationist beliefs might be one of those things parents are forcing onto their children without presenting the alternative, it des not require such a large side argument to state this point.

[Guest]

Show me the exact study you are refering to, and I will give you an answer. A summary analysis will be fine, if you don't have the original paper, but I want something that reveals the exact methods and data, not just a general "homeschoolers do better" claim.

Dusk, I thought the reason you hadn't yet answered my post was because you were researching these claims yourself. If that's not the case, could you go ahead and respond to it, please? I can bring up some of the more specific numbers I was thinking about if you'd like more.

[Jhaerlyn]

Darn ... as a teacher ..my Lunch Break is too short to read more than the first 4 posts :(

 

so I don't know if someone said this already ...BUT :

 

Duskrider mentioned that there is as much proof of evolutionary theory as there is of gravity. ...

 

I beg to differ. I can run an independant experiment testing our current understanding of gravity, whether or not it exists or not, and will find that my calculations will match, rather closely everyone else who has tested gravity ... refering of course to objects and how they "fall" to the earth. Gravity is an unexplained "force" in our universe that follows some regular patterns that, at least in this solar system, are easily observable and predictable. If I do the math right, I can tell you how long it will be before an arrow strikes the ground after I shoot it from a bow.

 

Evolution, on the other hand, doesn't fit in with the Scientific Method quite so nicely. As a matter of fact, it is, as a scientific theory, completely unpredictable. EVEN if you account for EVERY factor. Yes, like gravity, -- the Onion did a great one on the "theory of Gravity Debate"-- we have no real idea what it is, or what actually causes it to happen. But, happily, we don't need to, we can calculate it and predict it. Its very useful.

 

Evolution, on the other hand, not so much. I used to be a defender of Evolution, back in Jr. High ... (despite having a Southern Baptist Preacher as a Dad, from Cuba ;) ) ... because what I knew about it upto that point (evolution that is) made sense. And it didn't conflict with the creation story, it just gave a scientific back story to what God was doing ...

 

Then I got to high school... more specifically, 10th grade Biology. I asked," Why is Evolution important to know, to be able to "pass" biology?" Now, the teacher new a little of my background, and I guess he just assumed I was preparing to attack evolution. His response was something sarcastic that not only attacked my beliefs but basically boiled down to .... evolution is important because biologists say it is.

 

Needless to say, I wasn't convinced by the dodge of the answer. That was 1987-8. I'm still waiting for someone to actually explain the purpose that evolution has in understanding animals and the habitats they live in. Ok, its an interesting idea that kind of tells us a possible way that animals are connected to previous animals. But its a rather incomplete explanation, because it can never really explain: 1) how the change went from freak aberation in one species, to a functioning organ/limb/sense/etc in a "next step" species. 2) what sparked the change?

 

 

And there is NO way of really verifying the guesses that scientists put forth. To do the same kind of verifying of Evolution that we do with Gravity ...we'd have to be able to Time -travel ... and, until our Quantum Physicists figure that out ... we're stuck here ;)

 

ok, used up my lunch ... i'm going to go chug my V8 now :P

 

 

oh.. HOmeschooling .... I think its excellent for children who have parents who are willing to dedicate the time, and have the knowledge and resources to do it. I think the Public School system is suffering from the same malaise that the country is ...and is part of the overall "machine" to produce Consumer/Workers without any real capacity to change their government, society or world. And yes, I am a teacher ... this is one of the reasons why I am ... I'm hoping to change things .... but then, i'm a product of public school ...and have a hard time know how to go about making those changes lasting ;)