Mini, why did you choose homeschooling for your kids? And others, how are your kids

Parent Cafe
1

<p>taught? I just read a piece by Jean Anyon where she looks at how kids are taught depending on their social class? Mini, I am sure you read her work and I am curious, has any of her theories entered your mind?</p>

<p>For example, lower class kids are taught the same subject one way, middle class kids, another way, and upper class kids another way.</p>

<p>For example, lower class kids are taught more memorization skills, are taught more by rote, and are very time conscious.</p>

<p>Middle class kids are taught that there is more than one way to do things.</p>

<p>Upper class kids are taught to be more independent, creative, look at many sides of an issue, and more public speakink skills. This is so they can become leaders.</p>

<p>What we get is a reproduction of society, with the lower class learning lower class skills, upper class kids learning skills that will keep them in the upper class. We don’t really have a meritocracy.</p>

<p>I was taught at an elementary school that taught in a working class/middle class way.</p>

2

<p>Long story. No time for that now. </p>

<p>But it starts with the little chairs and desks. The Romans had a rule to never teach a subject in a way that a student can learn what needed to be learned standing up. This dictated both the length of a lesson and its shape. And if you go to All Soul’s College at Oxford, which is the most elite of the elite places - there are NO students, only fellows – they have the most extraordinary library, with lecterns all around, but NO chairs or tables. </p>

<p>Anyhow, we know how MUCH the upper classes think it costs to educate one of their young well - and these having so many advantages to begin with – roughly $35k a year, give or take. Well, if you took the value of the labor of many homeschoolers that is expended with their children rather than sending the kids to school and going to work, and $35k isn’t far off. So you could simply think of it as a upperclass education for folks who don’t have the cash.</p>

<p>(I rarely think of it that way, but it’s a thought…)</p>

<p>Re:the public speaking thing: I’m amused by the spiel about how “Reading will Get You Ahead”. The reality is that, with the exception of folks who record books for the blind, no one makes a living directly from reading. They do, however, from public speaking - negotiation, mediation, social skills, consensus building, rhetoric, and persuasion. I like books far more than most (hey, I write 'em!), but on the whole, I think reading, as a societal skill, is way overrated, and is a holdover from the “nation of immigrants” thing. Yes, everyone needs a reading baseline. But in a literate culture, virtually everyone acquires it, whether taught or not. (yes, lots of caveats - I have written widely on this subject.) Not everyone, however, acquires the rhetorical powers necessary to move ahead, or to lead when necessary.</p>

3

<p>

Interesting on several levels. My son, who excels in Latin and Greek and aspires to be a classicist (among other things) almost never sits down, either in class or to do homework (his teachers, bless them, always put up with it). He uses a bar-height counter-top for his work at home. I saw an interview with Donald Rumsfeld last year, and he works the same way. Several lecterns set up around his office–he doesn’t sit down either. A few weeks ago, I read an article about a diet specialist–a physician at a major research place–who not only doesn’t sit down at a desk, he has a standing desk and computer set up over a treadmill, which he keeps running at .7mhp, so that he’s walking comfortably the entire time he’s working.</p>

4

<p>Check it out: If Mini, married driver, it would be called…Oh never mind</p>

5

<p>I saw a video of Philips Exeter this week. I saw an economics class and a history class. They did have tables and chairs, but the teachers had very little control in the classrooms. The teachers were just facilitators. A teacher might bring up something and the kids just run with it. Nobody raises his/her hand. People speak when they want to speak. Yet, everybody is respectful and nobody talks over anybody else. </p>

<p>I agree about public speaking skills. Just huge. Most kids don’t get enough of this. The no sitting down way. I like it.</p>

<p>Driver, we can see what kind of school your kid goes to.</p>

6

<p>Mini, I am sure you guys had many philosophical and well thought out reasons for picking homeschooling. </p>

<p>I just want to say that it is a shame if the schooling option you had in your area used desks for young children (which is why I am assuming you chose to do homeschooling and not send them to schools with that type of environment and lesson structure). There are many kinds of learning environments in schools and I used to teach primary grades and both my own classrooms and those that my children were in from K-6, did not have desks. There was a lot of developmentally appropriate curriculum and creativity and integration and individualization and working at your own level, plus multi-age groupings. I am not saying you would have liked that either but luckily there are some educational environments that are not just the desk and chair set ups with big class sizes and everyone learning the same thing and through text books only and where the day is defined by strict schedules that separate subjects. So, if the school option for your kids was of the latter sort, I might see why you looked to an alternative. We happened to love our elementary school and like I said, it was not the sort of educational environment that I think you were rejecting (though I am taking liberty with your description of desks and chairs and length and time of separate subject lessons.)</p>

<p>I am definitely NOT knocking homeschooling but merely saying that there are some schools that are a happy medium between the type of educational environment you were rejecting and a homeschooling one. </p>

<p>Susan</p>

7

<p>I did not see dstark’s post when I posted above but he also brought up an aspect of my classrooms when I taught plus the ones that my own kids were in during their formative years…these were NOT quiet classrooms. Teachers did not “instruct” but rather they facilitated learning. There was much discussion and interaction. Kids did not raise their hands except when gathered in a whole group, though I am not sure they raise hands in some of their high school classes that are discussion based either. </p>

<p>When I was a teacher, I did not use text books barely at all either. Primary sources were used. I did not follow teacher guides or lesson books but created my own. A lot of the curriculum was integrated around themes and kids also had opportunities to delve into independent studies of their choosing. My own kids have done numerous independent studies. One of my kids craved going into depth on a topic, nothing like what was typical for her grade but had these kinds of opportunities. The classrooms were not just books and paper but rather used hands-on materials and first hand experiences. Problem solving and writing were emphasized…it was process oriented. Lots of projects and also collaborative learning opportunities. </p>

<p>The image I got of your desks and chairs and a teacher instructing and a new subject beginning every hour is just so foreign from what our elementary school was about. I taught there before my kids were born (not after) and my class’ day was not arranged by subject AT ALL. </p>

<p>Susan</p>

8

<p>Well, the latest trend in elementary education is to place the teachers’ desk in the back of the classroom, with the little desks still arrayed. The theory being that when the teacher is not actively teaching, there can be constant surveillance of what is happening, without the students seeing the teacher.</p>

<p>There are many wonderful schools, and teachers, virtually everywhere. Our choice of homeschooling did not have to do with that. But the flip side is that most teachers will tell that, since NCLB (and even a bit before) the average classroom is much more regimented than even a decade ago. In Chicago, teachers are required to READ from a script, and they must do so at the exact hour that the script requires. This allows supervisors to know EXACTLY what it going on in every classroom at every minute (yeah, right). Teachers can be fired for deviating from the script in any way. Not only can be, but have been (and there are cases currently winding their way through the courts.) In Georgia, the “master teacher” movement being operationalized means that a single (well-paid) master teacher supervises para-professionals without teaching degrees, and many without college degrees, and poorly paid, who are the only adults in the classrooms. (By the way - the test scores, for what they are worth - indicate that this approach works as well as the old one.)</p>

<p>And you should see the e-mails I get daily from school battle-scarred Oakland! You don’t know the half of it. (Of course, there are probably more public school kids in Oakland than in the entire state of Vermont.) I recently returned from San Diego, where I spent a couple of hours with a teacher in what is, by all accounts, a “good” elementary school. She told me that there, when a child wants to go to the bathroom, they now have to wear a big green visor with the word “BATHROOM” in white block letters emblazoned on it. Needless to say, a lot of kids won’t go, which has helped with a certain kind of retention, but not others.</p>

9

<p>Mini, I definitely agree that there are schools like you are describing out there and yes, those anecdotes appall me as an educator and as a parent. I understood why you would opt out. I was just saying that not all public schools have those kind of educational philosophies or environments. </p>

<p>Even your description of the teacher desk in “back”…I never ever used a teacher desk but to store huge piles of crap that I had to weed through on the last day to clean it off, but I never sat at one. I know schools have been forced to make changes but even now, my kids’ former elementary school is not like what you are describing. They have changed since I taught there but not THAT much philosophically. They have bought certain coordinated materials throughout the school, unlike when I taught there or when my kid attended but still, the philosophy is hands-on, integrated, process oriented, developmentally appropriate, multi-age, individualized, teacher as facilitator, and so forth. And still no desks. I do see a couple desks per room that are utilized for one or two kids per class who need an individual space with less distraction for when they are doing assigned tasks but these are the exception, not the norm. My kids never had a desk in the seven years they attended. I will say too that I don’t know that there was a “back of the room” in my classroom or the ones my kids were in there. I don’t think there was a front so much either. There were “areas”…some for individualized work, some for small groups to meet, some for the whole group to meet and lots and lots of materials. No assigned seats. I think some teachers there in the upper grades are assigning kids to a table for certain times of day but I never did. Kids changed around where they sat or stood or laid down depending on the activity at hand. </p>

<p>Susan</p>

10

<p>Since Leave No Child Behind and some similar local legislation, elementary school has become far more “academic” (read, “worksheet-oriented”) than it was when my kids were growing up. They have many happy memories of raising monarch butterflies, dressing up to simulate events in history, and building model villages of ancient civilizations. If they were growing up today, who knows? We might be home-schoolers. ;)</p>

11

<p>As I noted, there are likely more kids in the public school system in Oakland than in the entire state of Vermont. I presume you always taught in schools that had books, right? You have no idea how rare that is becoming in certain parts of, for example, southern California. I know you have trouble imagining that, but I am not talking about places that are exceptions - if you want to know what is happening, it would be worth your while to spend time reading about the Williams v. California lawsuit, just for a beginning. </p>

<p>To summarize:</p>

<p>In 2000, a class action suit (Williams v. California) was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of 100 public school parents from 46 schools, arguing that students – the overwhelming majority of whom were racial and ethnic minorities (or, it should be said, majorities) – were “educationally disadvantaged” when they were confined to schools with rat, mouse, and cockroach infestations. Schools with leaky roofs and broken and boarded-up windows, and peeling lead-based paints. Schools where the windows can’t be opened at all, and the temperatures often hit 120 degrees, or where heating systems don’t work and students wear coats, hats, and gloves throughout the entire school day to fight off the chill. Schools with defective and dangerous electrical systems. Schools with toilets that don’t work, with floors wet and sticky and smelling of human waste, and with unsafe drinking water, or without any drinking water at all. Schools without textbooks, or with three or four students per book, or where several classes share textbooks so that students can alternate doing homework. Schools where some classes have no formal, long-term teacher for the entire year, only a series of substitutes, some for as little as a single day. Schools so overcrowded that they’ve adopted multi-track schedules in which teachers and students take turns using two sets of classrooms, cutting the school year short by nearly four weeks of instruction. Schools where classrooms have 30 desks and 65 students, leaving students to perch on counters or simply stand in the back of the room, or rotate their seating.</p>

<p>The Governor and the State Superintendent of Schools did not contest the conditions, the evidence being so overwhelming, though they did try to ascribe blame elsewhere, by filing counter claims against local school districts (quickly dismissed). But the main elements of their defense were that students suffer no educational disadvantages as a result, for other schools were equally bad. That argument failing, they brought in expert after expert, 13 in all, some dubbed among the nation’s leading educational authorities (and surely paid accordingly), earnestly offering testimony that ameliorating these conditions wouldn’t have mattered: the kids would have failed anyway. It should be noted that of the 13 individuals offering expert testimony on behalf of the State of California., 10 of them were college professors – at Harvard, UCLA, Stanford, University of Pennsylvania, Boston University, and the Universities of Oregon, Indiana, Missouri, and Illinois. If it matters, and it probably does, as race is often bound up with one’s experiential base, all 13 were white. </p>

<p>This is the narrative that the largest state in the country has written for ‘minority’ (majority) children in the new apartheid that public education has come to represent. It doesn’t really make any difference, they are going to fail anyway, so they might as well be resigned to their fate. And one other thing can be said with some measure of certainty: regardless of where they live, and even if they are enrolled in public schools, the children of these 13 leading experts attend institutions that look, smell, feel, and operate nothing like those involved in Williams v. California. The narrative that accompanies the educational experts’ children to school everyday does not have them failing. And this is key: without those experts’ kids, without more affluent kids, without white kids attending and experiencing those same schools as described in Williams v. California, it is virtually impossible for parents, educators, or politicians to engage in meaningful discussion about the future of public education in this country. </p>

<p>It should be noted that Gov. Terminator did settle the case for $1 billion (to fix just the conditions noted in the law suit, in all of the districts cited, would have cost around $8 billion), but is now reneging on the money, so they will be back in court soon. Spend some time on the website <a href=“http://www.decentschools.org/court_papers.php[/url]”>www.decentschools.org/court_papers.php</a> for an interesting evening.</p>

<p>Now, mind you, this is even before one gets around to discussing “teaching techniques” - even having that discussion indicates an unintentional class bias (one which, by the way, I share.)</p>

12

<p>I went to over ten schools growing up…we had to take a big ole key, or hang something around our necks at the elementary schools I went to. I never had a problem with that. What was good about it, was that it was marked with the Classroom and if there was an emergency and student wasn’t in the classroom, they could very quickly be identified. You know, if the fire alarm is going off, the teacher can quickly see that the hook on the wall is empty, so John hasn’t returned, and if Johnny freaks a little bit, remember 1st grade, they can easily be led to their classroom.</p>

<p>I ALWAYS had assigned desks, with all my stuff in it, my crayons, my books, MY stuff, I thought it was really cool. My teachers had desks all over, I had rows, I had blocks of desks, I had times where I was able to put MY desk by itself cause the other kids were making me crazy</p>

<p>I went to school in King Cove Alaska, Anchorage Alaska, Portland, Beaverton, Missoula, Nurnberg Germany, two different middles schools and two different high schools in upstate NY.</p>

<p>At Ds school, after lunch, there is Silent Reading Time…everyone sits and “reads” for 15 minutes or so, depending on the schedule. I liked it. It would start for 5 minutes for 1st grade and build. </p>

<p>Ds had desks or desk areas at both their schools - there is something about your own desk to take care of. Kids moved around a lot for group work, desks were rearranged constantly, kids worked on the floor, in the halls, whereever, but having that place to put your stuff taught a little bit about responsibility…and at Parent Teacher night, it was fun sitting at Ds desks, we would leave notes for each other</p>

13

<p>Prop 13 was it? Argghhh…the state of our schools in California, while some districts are shining, others, where the money is really needed, lose out…NCLB, what a _____</p>

14

<p>Soozievt, you make a good point that there are all kinds of public schools. My experience just in one state ¶ has been wildly varied, from inner-city Philly to “privileged” top suburban districts.</p>

<p>Back when I was an education editor, I got to spend lots of time inside all kinds of schools – public, private and home. I saw some wonderful things happening in all of them. I have to admit that some of the Philly S.D. experiences were truly depressing, but when wonderful things happened there, you knew a real difference was being made. </p>

<p>It sounds like your local schools are doing a terrific job. One of my many concerns with NCLB is that schools that have been doing their own thing well may feel pressure to conform. </p>

<p>I go crazy with some of the dictates from D.C.! At one point following 9/11, Ed Secretary Rod Paige dictated that at one specific time (adjusted for time zone) on one particular day, ALL public schools across the country were to stop whatever they were doing and say the pledge of allegiance. The concept was that the pledge would be recited in unison by kids throughout the land, from NYC to LA. Great PR news segment but ridiculous in practice - kids had to stop whatever they were engaged in (gym? a science lab? a play?) to participate in this exercise. How is this supporting the educational process!??! AAAGH! This is the kind of thing that could drive me to home schooling!</p>

15

<p>Well, that’s now in play in Chicago, and it isn’t just the pledge, but an entire scripted school day.</p>

<p>As the thing from National Business Roundtable gets eliminated, more and more kids, and more and more schools will fail. And pretty soon, those schools won’t exist any more to be “reformed”. As previously noted, that’s the whole point.</p>

16

<p>Mini, I think you may have misunderstood my point. I AGREE with you about some very poor learning environments in many of our country’s schools. Yes, I am famliar with the lawsuit you included in your post because I think I have read about it on CC (maybe you posted it in the past). What I was saying is that I can see pulling your kids from a certain kind of learning environment. I was merely saying that we can’t generalize that all public schooling is like that which you were rejecting and thus the alternative need not be homeschooling (but was in your case). SOME schools have learning environments that physically and philosophically and quantitatively are quite different than the situations you were rejecting or pulling your kids from, that was all. I simply was describing the wonderful elementary school where I was once a teacher and where my kids subsequently attended when I no longer was a teacher there and also where my husband has been a school board member. While I would agree with AParent5 that in very recent years, there have been some shifts since my kids were there in ways she is describing, it still is a FAR cry from the situations or even “desk arrangements” you were understandably rejecting. I am quite cognizant that some terrible educational practices exist including the one you shared in Oakland. </p>

<p>By the way, while my school district in rural Vermont is NOT racially diverse, it is quite economically diverse and so while we are not inner city poor, we have numerous kids on free and reduced lunch. One third of our graduates will not be college bound. The elementary school has won national and state awards and is excellent in my opinion. I would not say that of our middle or high school but this elementary school was and still is. I even think YOU would consider sending your kids there :D. I have read your description of your older D delving into various areas of interest and also working at developmental levels beyond her typical grade or chronological age and I can tell you, that my kids were also able to do this at our elementary school. Also, small class size is something our community values and I believe they the school policy will not allow it to go over a certain size…dunno the size officially, maybe 18 but most primary classrooms have about 15 kids in them and the upper elementary classes have a similar number. All classes are multi age and not due to the size of the school but due to philisophy which is patterned after the English Primary Classroom movement or philosophy…has been this way since before I arrived there in 1983. </p>

<p>Believe me, I am aware of the ills of many other schools and that about which you speak. Just saying that not all schools offer up that same dish. There are some that I venture to suggest that even YOU might like. :D</p>

17

<p>As noted, the reason we homeschooled didn’t have anything to do with the conditions at the local school (or any schools). And, for the record, my younger d. DOES take some classes at the local high school (I can’t work with her on Spanish too well, and her math is beyond me.) I didn’t “reject” the local school, or “pull my kids out of schools”.</p>

<p>I have trouble with the whole idea of compulsory “education”, in good schools or not. I have always thought of schools as a bad substitute for a good family. I would have no trouble thinking of schools as a library - take the books you want, and the learning you want, and leave the rest.</p>

<p>And I am glad that schools like those you describe still exist, and that there are caring people there. I know of PLENTY in Oakland.</p>

18

<p>JEM, I agree with you that some of the policies in recent years that are being handed down from above make it so that the way I taught not too long ago, would be more difficult to practice today (though I think our elementary school still does a great job of it but I see some recent shifts since my kids have left it as I do substitute teach there). Still the basic philosophy of the school has not changed and is very well regarded. But when I taught, I created my own curriculum. I even had my own report cards (I did narrative reports)…there was very little I had to follow. I think they have more guidelines that they must follow now but it is nothing like the kinds of classes that Mini is describing and which I too find quite troubling. While I was mostly describing our elementary school, I have to say that Vermont is a bit more “forward thinking” with education…for example, state assessments are in the form of writing portfolios and math problem solving portfolios and also benchmarks. Also my entire school district, not just my elementary school but all the other ones, use multi age classrooms based on a philosophy, not numbers.</p>

19

<p>Just came upon this discussion. I also homeschooled my boys, and, like mini, my reasons had little to do with the conditions of the local schools. We homeschooled from the beginning, and they never took any classes at school until junior high, when they tried out PE and music at the local school. My boys also attended high school part-time, taking the classes of their choice at the school, taking some classes at the community college, and doing the rest at home.</p>

<p>As for chairs and such, our homeschooling took place on the couch, on the floor, in their beds (reading, mainly), at the kitchen table, and outside–not to mention frequent “field trips” to the zoo, children’s museum, science museum, beach, mountains, etc., etc. </p>

<p>My main reason to homeschool was to be able to individualize my boys’ education. We could study what interested them, not some set curriculum. And they could move ahead at their own speed, or take more time, if that was needed. For example, my younger son loved math as a little guy and liked to spend extra time on it, so he was soon ahead of grade level. He could easily do that at home. On the other hand, he was a late reader. (unlike his older brother, who was reading adult books by age 6) At school he would undoubtedly have been in remedial reading, as he could hardly read anything by the end of second grade. Sometime during third grade, however, reading “clicked” for him, and he quickly moved up to, and beyond, “grade level.” (without having his self-image damaged by being in a remedial class) Being at home, he could study other subjects with hands-on activities and/or through me reading to him, so his late reading did not hold him back anywhere else. (We did LOTS of hands-on science, something my boys both loved.)</p>

<p>In addition, homeschooling was just good for the family. My husband worked swing shift, so this allowed him to spend more time with the boys. He had days off in the middle of the week, so we would take our days off then, or we would have one of those days be our “field trip” day. We were able to take September camping vacations, when places were less crowded. (We had great fun exploring different places and becoming closer as a family.)</p>

<p>I agree with mini. I have nothing against schools. I just felt homeschooling was better, at least for our family. Both my boys have graduated from high school/homeschool now, and I have absolutely no regrets. Nor do they.</p>

20

<p>The teaching method at Exeter is called the Harkness method. Here is a blurb from their website:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>My S1 went to a private school that used the Harkness method. It is great if you have an outspoken child, but tougher on the ‘observer’ type, the type who would rather not say what he thinks about feminism at 10 am in the morning, the type who would rather not say much in front of really cute girls.</p>

<p>When we moved, he went to a hyper-traditional English boy’s school with desks in a row, no discussion, pin-drop silence in the room. I ahve to say, in certain subjects, Calculus for example, they covered far more ground, more comprehensively. He preferred that environment over the other ‘chatty’ one. In fact, he rather likes the 200 kid lectures at university too. The best professors, the best speakers, seem to teach the larger ‘sold-out’ classes.</p>

<p>Like homeschooling versus public school versus private school: to each their own, eh?</p>