Have you ever written a post on your initial decision to homeschool?Why no I don't think I have, but an excuse to expostulate is always welcome.
My decision to homeschool came when I was about 17, I was thoroughly fed up with school, and swore that my kids would never have to put up with that kind of crap. Of course, I was a math-/computing- prodigy, taking CSC 110 at the local college when I was 9...and the continuous dispute between me and my parents was:
Parents: Do your homework.
Aretae: It's stupid work.
Parents: Yes, but you need good grades.
A: It's so stupid that my brain's going to melt from extra stupid-lasers.
P: Please do something, and turn it in. We know you won't learn anything, but the grades are important.
Of course, I was also the kid who was unmoved by punishment or restriction. If you don't get good grades we'll ... nothing worked. I could not bring myself to take the schools' worthless approach to learning seriously, threats, punishment, or anything else.
Anyhow, I've been involved with homeschooling for about 15 years now, and there's one question and ONLY one question worth asking:
Is the cost of one parent not working (much) outside the home (I threatened to stay home with the kid if my wife wouldn't back in '01) worth the benefit of keeping your kid away from the crap they get in school.
Benefits:
- Closer family -- In an awful lot of modern families, kids are somewhat external to the family...with most/all of their cares/interests elsewhere. Not true in homeschool families. Kids share with parents/siblings... you have a better, closer bond with your children than if they're schooled.
- Academics -- A long time ago, I read something that suggests that homeschooled kids are, on average, several years ahead of traditionally schooled kids in general. My aunt the college admissions councilor says that there's coming to be a preference for homeschooled kids who know are better learners. Since something like 6-9 minutes of each school hour is devoted to learning, this isn't shocking.
- Socialization -- The Lord-of-the-flies social aspects of school are atrocious. Single-age kids competing with one another for scarce resources (teacher favor, class position, etc.) is about the most toxic social environment anywhere outside of Daytime TV. Drugs/gangs don't help.
- Obedience -- I know I've said it a billion times...read Gatto's 7-lesson schoolteacher...and assume he's not exaggerating. You know how the formalists say "people need to be led". An awful lot of that is schooling where they're taught to need to be led. Schools teach obedience. I don't like that.
- Freedom -- I'm a hard-core libertarian. I think that freedom is good. Homeschooling massively increases the opportunity for freedom for the kids.
- Flexibility -- 1 parent working substantially increases family flexibility. If you're Foseti who tours the world on his job, or Aretae who used to travel the states...it's nice to have the ability to bring the family with sometimes.
- Family size -- Homeschooling tends to lead to larger families. Interesting correlation...can't prove causation.
Costs
- Financial -- 1 income household is a BIG difference. However, if one parent makes substantially more, one parent isn't working already, and/or the other parent would spend more (on clothes, on cars, on childcare after school, on private school), this might be mitigated
- Time away -- most people do much better if they have some time away from the kids. Folks starting homeschooling don't realize how important it is for the homeschooling parent to get some time away, doing stuff with other adults.
- Abnormal -- It's weird. It's not the same as expensive private schools. It doesn't sound good at dinner parties. It takes over your life, finding stuff, and then explaining why you're doing it.
- Difficulty -- the homeschooling parent works hard to help the kid learn. And there's little in the way of guidebooks, you actually have to learn new stuff all the time. And your first plan for how things will go won't work. Probably not your 2nd, 3rd, 4th plans either. "I had 6 theories, then I had 6 kids, now I have no theories".
Good luck with the decision, if you're thinking that way.
Posts
11 comments:
It's lots less abnormal now than it was 20 years ago.
Yeah, my grades were a lot better in college classes where homework did not count as part of the grade.
"Hey Dr. Zammit, how come I got a C in your class?"
"You didn't do the homework"
"What was my grade on the Final?"
"You got an A"
"Let's try this again, who got the Highest grade on the final?"
"You did."
"So, how come I got a C?"
I missed the part on the syllabus where homework was 20%. The previous quarter it was only 5% and I didn't do any assignments there either.
I'm reasonably certain Pete was in the same boat, as I doubt he did any of the homework either.
Speaking of, you hear from Pete and Em at all?
Schools teach obedience. I don't like that.
Amen, brother.
And I didn't take college computer at 9, but I did at 16. Too bad it was COBOL (it was 1974). Still, didn't turn me off of tech.
Outstanding post.
Mark,
Having taught courses before in engineering, what you've run into is one of those utilitarian trade offs that nobody ever tells you the straight deal on. Let me fill you in, I'm working in industry these days so I'm not concerned with revealing any guild secrets.
If you don't assign, collect, and grade homework, and assign it nominally a nontrivial portion of the grade in a class, a much larger proportion of the class will fail. As in going from maybe 20% not passing the class towards closer to 40%. You're probably not part of the 20% that is being benefited here---those who have insufficient discipline to stay caught up without the regular threat of homework being collected or the raw intellectual power to get by without doing it, so it probably sucks for you. That said, it is the tradeoff being made. I did have a long running experiment though, by offering to pass ANYONE, no matter how bad their average was going into my final, which was comprehensive, who could make a B on it, and to give at least a B to anyone who could squeeze an A out of me on my final. I believe it was invoked only once---a student who performed badly on the first exams due to unusual circumstances that managed to put in a solid performance on the final.
Very helpful, thanks.
As far as obedience goes, there's no need to teach it to the 9 year-old taking college classes.
That doesn't mean that others don't need a little gentle guidance.
Am I wrong?
I'd second everything Aretae said. "What he said!"
My decision to homeschool is the result of similar motives - and we looked at the pro-con in pretty much identical terms.
I'd add that the financial thing can be huge - but most of the pain is in the first few months after you sacrifice that second check. Once you acclimate, it's not so bad. I was a contractor for years, and the added stress of not having backup income was harsh at points. But if you have dependable income, that's not as big a factor.
We got more grief from the family than from anyone else. The most common objection was the socialization issue, which I thought was ridiculous - you want your kids socialized to Lord of the Flies? Sheesh.
I think we're on plan 7 or 8 now, but having made the decision, it's just a matter of experimentation - not failure.
Foseti, you might appreciate this - my real decision to homeschool I made when I was about 22, reading a history of Europe in the 1830s. The author was describing how the British aristocracy raised its young, and I realized that with modern technology (this was in '92 - and things have improved since then) anyone of even moderate means could educate their children in the same manner as the reactionaries of old.
Foseti,
As far as I can tell, all my super-smart friends (college classes before puberty or equivalent) believe something close to what you said. I believed it as well, until somewhere between 16 and 20, when I changed direction.
I personally have almost no positive self-discipline to speak of. I do what is interesting, and if it's boring (especially intellectual and boring), not only can no one else make me do it...but I can't make myself do it either. On the other hand, my negative self-discipline is nearly perfect. I can refrain from damn near anything at almost zero effort-cost.
I will grant you that I get away with this approach because I'm bright, and can IQ + interest my way through all problems. And that other folks with somewhat less in the IQ department would need to learn some self-discipline. On the other hand...I think there's a HUGE distinction between self-discipline and other-discipline, and that schools only teach the 2nd, not the first.
I don't, fundamentally, have a big problem with folks choosing to allow others to make their decisions for them. Some folks don't like decisions, and some folks don't make good decisions.
But I do have a problem with folks believing that they can do well with not making their own decisions without a damn fine selection process for who will make their decisions. Or that ANY prebuilt authority is a good choice.
My actual normal line for unschooling is:
I am a master-teacher.
I can guarantee that any one person you want me to teach (with an IQ over ~85) can have a classics-level education, with an associate's degree (or IB equivalent) by age 18.
Or I can teach them ONLY that they are truly responsible for their own life, their decisions and their consequences but not guarantee ANY subject matter knowledge (Though really I can probably actually guarantee 3Rs, at a 98% confidence soft guarantee).
PICK ONLY ONE. I unschool because I think the above decision is a no-brainer. Even for said Walmarter.
On the other hand, as above, ALL the smart people I know, and most less smart people I know disagree with me. So I really should be less sure of myself.
Perfidy,
Great comment. Thanks. I've been a contractor for years as well. Though this past 3 have had a stable job, it goes against my constitution.
In order of least understood benefits, the Lord of the Flies objection is 2nd on my list, but the issue that NO ONE understands until they homeschool is the improved relationship with the children. It's shocking, it's amazing, it's obvious once you're doing it, and it's ubelieveable until you do.
As to families giving grief...that should actually be called out in my initial essay. Huge issue is managing family response. Happens to every homeschool family I know, and I've known A LOT of them.
Edison/Ben Franklin are strong reasons to homeschool as well.
Probably the one thing I treasure most about homeschooling is the relationship angle. I've finally finagled my way back to where I was three years ago, where I'm working from home the majority of the time - I go into the office once or twice a week.
But even when I was away, having the kids at home was a huge benefit. It's an unscientific comparison, but homeschool kids who are not subject to rigid regimentation and obedience training are typically much better behaved than those who are guided by the tender hand of the public schools. When I first moved to the DC area, what, 11 years ago? (damn, time flies) I was appalled at the behavior of the children I saw in public. And these are the products of what is consistently rated among the best public schools in the nation, whose parents are by and large successful SWPLs working in or near the government.
Since we've only ever homeschooled, I can't say that I've ever seen the difference in our kids, but I'd never want them sent away for someone else to do a shitty job raising them. Which leads to...
Aretae - I wouldn't back down from your position if I were you. Of course, if you succeeded in option 2, option 1 would more or less happen by itself. My boy was learning about t4 cells, immune biochemistry, and associated subjects last fall. He was so excited about it, he was telling grocery store cashiers about it. I don't think that that sort of thing ever happens in schools. And allowing a child to reach his own level no matter how high, or low, is infinitely better - and no one can do that better than parents, if they're willing to put in the effort.
Our local homeschool group has a spread of IQs in the parents. Ranging from roughly, me, down to around 100. The parents who I judge are at the lower end of this scale are doing the same things that I am doing in terms of time with children, love, and effort. The results are well-adjusted, well-behaved and largely self-controlled and motivated children of average intelligence and well above average stock of knowledge.
For me, just as with them, I often find myself cramming to keep ahead of my child, who wants to know about things I haven't bothered to learn - like the immune biochemistry I mentioned above. Me and my boy might be further out to the right on the bell curve than the other family, but the process is the same, and the positive benefits in all matters besides the purely educational are the same.
Yikes, my last comment was highly unclear. Clarification:
Almost all the really smart folks I know disagree with me on Foseti's position:
"That doesn't mean that others don't need a little gentle guidance."
My education position (PICK ONLY ONE) seems tolerably well accepted, once folks think about it.
Post a Comment