Besides, don't home schools sometimes bring in other people to teach as well? For example, if the children are to learn about computers, you have someone who works in the field to come in and give instruction?
There are entire homeschooling networks which have grown immensely and coordinated better with the advent of the internet. The kids who seem to to do the very best with homeschooling are involved in a network of homeschooled children who regularly meet, parents with specialized teaching skills for science, higher math, foreign language, extracurricular activities, etcetera.
But I think it's worth at least noting that these children do better than most isolated homeschooled children because they network, meet regularly and have access to specialized learning in their network.
...in many cases, part-time for just a subject or two. We see a lot of that--homeschoolers taking a couple of public school classes, or taking online or community college courses, in areas where they need specialized teaching (commonly sciences, music, foreign language, etc.).
QED.
I think the welfare concern is probably not as big an issue as people think--one hears about the exceptional, extreme cases in the news of course. But we have been surprised by how little oversight there is. My son has been accepted at both of our state research universities with his tuition waived so he is doing fine, but while we're glad not to have the state on our backs it always seems like they should be a bit more concerned about the academics.
Ah but you are not only an educator, you are a *college professor* hence you have a deep and lengthy understanding of the learning process and how it relates to the developmental process and there *is* something to be said for that.
As to the educational welfare of these kids, there are some states who require homeschooled children to pass a grade-level test appropriate for their age and if they fail over a certain period of time they can be mandated to public school education or proof of private school education. The only problem I have with this is the whole nature of the error of standardized testing and how it's not exactly applicable to the "real world" work scenario for the most part.
Kacey - I would challenge you to define delayed. This term is bandied about by the educational institution and I think that people really need to think about how its being defined.
I would define it as acheivement on a standardized test. The norms that the test encompasses determine who is advanced, average, or delayed.
I wouldn't. I'd define it as a child grades behind in more than one subject and hindered in other fields by said imbalance. Standardized tests are round hole tests for a society of pegs which are round, square, triangular, polygonal (don't have the time to look up the proper word for these - cylindrical, etc) and many other shapes. They are not the educational benchmark the Every Child Left Behind Act tried to make them.
Unfortunately, the creation of these norms is based off of what is being done in the public schools. Thus, I would say that the term delayed is a form of circular reasoning because the debate has been predefined.
With that being said, I have met so many kids who are "delayed" but are absolutely brilliant. Think
Howard Gardner's Domains.
There is no real measure for all of these yet. Some people have attempted to craft what is known as a "G score" but they are no where close to accomplishing this, IMHO.
With that being said, how can we really say if a homeschooler is "delayed" or not? Is government mandated and normed remediation the answer?
To me, if a homeschooled child cannot function socially, educationally nor professionally in the real world they are "delayed" or at least not shaped well. Nod, however, to the link and cognitive learning - each person *is* different and there are plenty of people who would be deemed socially delayed who are educationally and professionally successful. The uniqueness in society is being devalued and that's wrong - something that shouldn't be sacrificed in the name of standardized education.
I wonder how many of us here on MT would pass our state-prepared standardized tests? (looks at the WASL prep pages for science and shudders)
Delayed, in the case of the students I am thinking of, means 6th grade students who cannot read at a 2nd grade level; 7th grade students who cannot add and subtract 3-digit numbers without regrouping; 7th grade students who cannot spell their own last names; a 16 year old who was withdrawn to be "home schooled" (read "baby sitter") during 7th grade who came back for special education assessment so she could enroll in an alternative high school and get her diploma... I could go on. Are they the extreme end of what I see? Yes. I also see a student that I staffed out of special education last year; he had been home-schooled until his mother realized that he was not progressing at the same rate his older brother had, and she recognized that something was going on that she could not deal with. She brought him to the elementary school he would otherwise have been attending and had him assessed for special education; he qualified and was placed. He received additional services in reading, written language, and math; he was staffed out of special education last year because, at his triennial review, his skills had not only caught up with his peers, but surpassed them. By his own request, he remains in public school; he prefers to learn with his peers than his siblings, and his mother respects that choice.
Are there kids for whom alternate schooling is appropriate? Of course there are; I never said there wasn't. But neither does that mean that there are not students for whom traditional schooling is appropriate. One does not preclude the other. My parents are both educated; my father holds 5 advanced degrees in English and Library Science. Nonetheless, he was a rotten teacher for anyone under college level, and my mother (despite all evidence to the contrary) consistently refers to herself as stupid and incapable in comparison to the rest the immediate family - and steadfastly refused to help with any homework other than editing papers past the time my sister and I each entered 5th grade, because she didn't feel she was capable.... and in all honesty, they'd have made rotten teachers for either of us, despite college educations and a strong desire to see us both attain college educations ourselves. My sister and I both graduated from the public school system; we both have Master's degrees; I have been a teacher for 15 years - and if I ever do have children, it's highly unlikely I would choose to home school them. That's my preference; you have yours.
Nice post.
The main problem with many homeschooled children is they are never grouped - never networked - and real life gets in the way of teaching and learning. It's easy to become lackadaisical with home learning structure.
I used to assist another black belt in teaching children and she still teaches one of two homeschooled brothers. They are quite intelligent, but there is absolutely no doubt they are socially separate and their physical fitness and development is lacking. I'm sure they will become good engineers, but emotionally they will likely be wrecks. Why is this important? Because we all, during development, have various stages where we seek the norm - we must fit in. Now there are a few exceptions to this - children who are more comfortable being different and in a healthy way - but they are, indeed, few. It is not a bad thing and requires guidance.
Moreover, what you resist persists. When these young men find adulthood, they will be met with many social challenges they may not be able to face. I worry for them. I liken it to sending them into the woods with no knowledge of survival skills.
Like anything, if homeschooling is done right - dedicated, purposeful, well-rounded and not neglected - it can be a wonderful thing. It just is *NOT* for everyone.
