pull down to refresh
What resonated with me was that the author of the article said he and his wife spend 2 hours or less per day teaching their child.
6 hours of classroom instruction = 2 hours or less of home school and then you have the rest of the day for extracurricular activities
More play time I am all for but I often think homeschooling coddles kids so much. No chance to develop and face challenges that comes with just living life with other humans.
I commend those who homeschool their children and have fantastic results but saying all public education is terrible and waste I disagree with. Some children thrive in those settings. This idea that public education is a mass failure is a fallacy.
American medical schools are filled with children who went to public schools all their life. From all different types of economic backgrounds.
This idea that public education is a mass failure is a fallacy.
It really isn't. There's no evidence of actual human capital development in government schools and trust me that researchers are trying to find that there is. Smart motivated kids learn stuff on their own and schools take credit for it.
Well if that were the case why did the state develop schools in the first place?
Compliance. Literally, compliance.
Also, why would it be surprising if the state completely failed at achieving a stated objective? That's what normally happens.
But look how many people can read across the economic spectrum.
That alone is worth something?
It's a false attribution. People could read before government school and homeschooled kids read better on average than government school students.
Yeah I would need to do more reading and research to present my position better.
I am taking a mass blanket approach to this topic. Thinking about the agrarian world we emerged from and how many kids were learning to read at that time.
Compared to today when kids aren’t working the farms but in public schools no matter how bad it is are still getting some level of education.
You're presenting a false choice. There's no reason homeschooled kids can't spend time with their peers and they often do.
Sure, but parents don't select a random subset of peers like school does. Do you think the presumably wealthy parents of homeschooled children will make sure their kids are interacting with poor families? Because those aren't going to be at the private extracurricular clubs.
Another false distinction. Wealthy parents go out of their way to live in catchment areas with other rich parents, specifically to curate who their kids interact with.
Government schools are not even a little bit random. They are for the families that live around them.
This is definitely true and the reality of my upbringing. My public school was often mocked by the other richer school districts.
I was often talked down upon due to my school district being so bad. Looking back it definitely was bad hahaha.
If you put your kid in public school, it's going to interact with poor families. If you homeschool it, it's not. I'm sorry but that's just really obvious to me, given my experience. I guess that's where we'll agree to disagree.
My main point is wealthy parents don't understand the value of their children interacting with poor people.
A lot of parents noticed this during the lockdowns. They'd finish the entire week's material in a few hours, which left many wondering what schools are doing with the other 90% of their kids' time.
Not every family has the time energy or educational background to make it successful without support.
Obviously there are people barely getting by at all, and that's who public schools are for, the lowest common denominator that is without recourse.
That's not the majority of families choosing that option though, there's a strong system of cultural and economic manipulation to steer people this way.
If you have the faculty to even ponder your situation, you have the faculty to choose and execute: #1414513
And what if your parents are as dumb as box of rocks
It's well known that public education majors are the dumbest students in universities.
What if we turned over the nation's children to those people?
But those dumbest students maybe be the decent students in high school who could get into college.
So while they can’t hack STEM studies they may fit well with the knowledge that is needed to educate children.
Plus education doesn’t pay well. If it paid like being a Wall Street investment banker then the best of the best would go into education.
The author of this article (Dino) said he did not go into teaching for the money and he did not leave teaching because of low pay. He left the public school system for 'political' reasons. Teaching was the best part of his job and every year 'teaching' became a smaller and less important component of his job.
My dad and his friends felt very similarly.
The pay is fine for what the job should be but the job is mostly dealing with unnecessary BS.
I don't think the pay is fine for what the job is, but we don't know what the right pay is either because the market is so distorted by the government. (Even for private school teachers, I believe their pay gets anchored to public school teacher expectations, similar to how Medicare somewhat dictates medical pricing for the healthcare sector as a whole).
All I know is, the reason that our brightest students don't go into teaching is because the profession is low paid and low prestige. I heard that in Korea, teaching is seen as prestigious as law and medicine (with lower pay but better lifestyle), and thus you get a lot of talented people go into teaching.
It's fair to note that it's not all about intelligence, but then you shouldn't make the intelligence comparison between parents and teachers.
In almost all cases, parents care more about their kids' development than a government employee does. Why wouldn't you expect that to overcome the intelligence gap? It's not like parents have to come up with the education materials themselves (just like teachers don't). They can use just as good of teaching materials, and often better, than the schools use.
I understand where you are coming from and I think your perspective comes from years of being inside the system and seeing how it operates. The truth is that traditional schooling often struggles to balance quality education with the administrative and political pressures placed upon it. When those pressures outweigh the needs of the students real learning suffers.
Homeschooling when done with intention and structure can indeed open up a world of possibilities. It allows parents to tailor the curriculum to the interests and strengths of their child. It creates the opportunity for deeper focus and mastery rather than racing through material for the sake of standardized testing. However homeschooling also requires commitment discipline and resources. Not every family has the time energy or educational background to make it successful without support.