tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-310255482024-03-05T03:18:27.716-07:00Marcy's MusingsVarious thoughts on subjects including faith, homeschooling, current events, education, and anything else that sounds interesting!Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.comBlogger151125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-8547114855515666892009-12-20T16:19:00.002-07:002009-12-20T16:29:39.117-07:00More on Social Benefits of HomeschoolingOK, it's been a really long time since I've posted, and maybe few people are even checking in any more. But as I was posting a comment on someone's blog today, it occurred to me that perhaps others would benefit from reading more about the social benefits of homeschooling. <br /><br />In spite of mounting evidence that homeschooling is positive for most kids socially, there are still a lot of people who believe homeschooling produces social misfits. This is my response to a few of them.<br /><br />I see here there are several who have said homeschooling is a negative for kids socially. Current research and the experiences of real homeschoolers say otherwise: homeschooling exposes kids to the real world far more effectively than sending them to school. After all, when in the adult world do you EVER spend hours every day sitting in a room with 30 other people exactly the same age you are? Homeschooling is work, no doubt about it, but it produces tremendously positive results in the lives of most homeschooled kids, academically, socially, emotionally and in many other ways. For more on the subject, take a look at this book: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Well-Adjusted-Child-Social-Benefits-Homeschooling/dp/1600651070/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1261350268&sr=1-1">The Well-Adjusted Child: The Social Benefits of Homeschooling</a>, by Rachel Gathercole.<br /><br />I'm not saying you should necessarily homeschool. Homeschooling, in my opinion, isn't for everyone. But don't let the naysayers convince you it will hurt your child socially. I know MANY homeschoolers - the vast majority of them are much better socially than most schooled kids I know. In fact, it's a standing joke among many homeschoolers: "Oh, yes, but that (schooled) child is so well socialized" (or the reverse: "Yes, poor, undersocialized homeschoolers"!). <br /><br />Homeschooling allows kids to interact with others naturally, in real, everyday situations. It provides opportunities for parents to see how their child is interacting with others and provide immediate feedback. It allows the child to watch as their parents model proper social skills, and to experiment with new ones. If parents make reasonable efforts to keep their children engaged (Scouts, sports, clubs, church activities, etc.), kids have the opportunity to make friends the same way adults do - based on common interests and not limited in terms of age. Older kids learn to help younger ones; younger kids make close friends of older ones and find good role models. You don't get the artificial "we don't play with you because we're in 5th grade and you're only in 4th" baloney. <br /><br />I've been involved in the homeschooling world for 37 years, off and on. I was homeschooled for 1st grade, 6th grade, and all of high school. I went on to have a very positive experience in college, graduating successfully from a solid private university. I have since worked with homeschooling families in several different contexts and have homeschooled my own daughters for 9 years, since my older daughter was 3 1/2. In my experience, the vast majority of homeschoolers are outgoing, friendly, polite, and articulate. They are generally far more pleasant to be around, and interact better with younger kids, same-age peers, older kids, and adults, than most schooled kids do. And if you really stop to think about it, that makes sense; just as you'd find if you crammed 30 rats in a cage all together, 30 kids crammed in a classroom together (or worse, hundreds or even thousands of kids crammed in a building together) end up biting and devouring each other. <br /><br />Homeschooling has tremendous social benefits; be sure to take a look at Rachel Gathercole's book for more. In the meantime, don't be afraid to consider homeschooling. :)Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-83646043006493174902009-08-20T17:20:00.003-06:002009-08-20T17:26:12.451-06:00A "Biblioblog" - what a great concept!I recently discovered a wonderful new idea - "biblioblogging"! Over at "Reading to Know," <a href="http://www.readingtoknow.com/">http://www.readingtoknow.com/</a>, Carrie blogs about her favorite books, and her kids' favorites as well. She's a great resource for reading moms as well as those of us looking for resources for our kids - funny, thought-provoking, with some wonderful video clips and some great guest bloggers as well.<br /><br />Check it out! :)Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-51504380600455006402009-08-07T16:08:00.002-06:002009-08-07T16:16:07.144-06:00Something Fishy About Health Care ReformOK, so I rarely post on this blog about anything unrelated to homeschooling. But this issue concerns me deeply, because it affects all Americans' most dearly-held rights. On the WhiteHouse.gov site, you can currently find the following notice:<br /><br /><blockquote>There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to <a href="mailto:flag@whitehouse.gov">flag@whitehouse.gov</a>.</blockquote><br /><br />Does this concern others as much as it does me? This sounds as if the White House is asking ordinary people like you and me to report on our neighbors and on those companies and charities who are telling us what they believe about the President's health care reform plan. What are they going to do with this information? There is no way this is a Constitutional position for a President or his administration to take - it is a blatant effort to curtail our freedom of speech. Even if you agree 100% that everything the President says will turn out exactly as he hopes it will, can you really support this kind of censorship?<br /><br />I sent the following email to the link they posted for reporting something "fishy." I hope you will too - and I hope everyone else in America will flood this mailbox with protests, making it clear that we will not stand for this kind of thought control.<br /><br /><blockquote>I want to report something fishy I found on the web regarding health care reform. Here is the site:<br /><br /><a href="mhtml:%7B74A9DDA1-A27F-4F26-9F9D-9EB2BDCBA2BE%7Dmid://00000000/!x-usc:http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/">http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/</a><br /><br />Our Constitution guarantees the people freedom of speech. Asking people to report to the White House when others disagree with the President's position (even if that means posting facts the President happens to disagree with) is a blatant violation of that freedom of speech. The truth is, the right to free speech means people even have the right to post flat-out lies about policy issues; and while I certainly would prefer they didn't, stopping them or even threatening to stop them is a violation of the Constitution the President swore to uphold only a few months ago. Guaranteeing free speech only to those who agree with the government's position is the definition of totalitarianism, and it has no place in America.<br /><br />I urge you to remove this IMMEDIATELY from your website and ensure that proper Constitutional protections are preserved for the people. The American people love our liberty; we will not stand idly by and allow it to be usurped in the name of "truth." The President, of all people, ought to be defending the right of ALL the people to believe, to say, and to publish what they choose.<br /><br />PRESERVE OUR FREEDOM OF SPEECH!!!!!<br /></blockquote>Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-26856568128764830722009-07-19T21:14:00.002-06:002009-07-19T21:19:18.408-06:00And On a Totally Unrelated Topic . . .This blog has almost exclusively become a blog about homeschooling; however, the vast majority of homeschooling families include two married parents. Therefore, an occasional link to an article or post that will strengthen marriages doesn't seem totally out of line - and today I have a good one for you.<br /><br />In tough economic times, many of us are looking for inexpensive ways to stay close to our spouses. Over on the blog <em>Mom's Notes</em>, there's a wonderful post entitled "<a href="http://blogs.icta.net/mom/2009/07/date-ideas/">30 Ideas for Dating Your Mate</a>." What the title doesn't tell you is that these are cheap-but-fun ideas. So click on the link, read the article, print it, and enjoy! :)Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-57768338063117106102009-06-22T08:45:00.002-06:002009-06-22T08:53:35.282-06:00Homeschooling Helps Schools Financially?For years, one of the favorite criticisms of homeschooling has been that it "drains resources from the public schools." After all, the reasoning goes, schools get paid per-pupil, so homeschooling, by removing students from the schools, reduces the amount of money the schools make. (Of course, this argument ignores the fact that the reason schools get paid per student is that each student also COSTS the school money, but why point out the obvious, right?) :)<br /><br />But <a href="http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/21/home-schooling-school-districts-receive-net-gain/">an article in yesterday's Washington Times online </a>highlights a new study that finds that homeschooling actually benefits the schools' bottom line. <br /><br /><blockquote>What Mr. Wenders and Miss Clements found, however, was that home-schoolers save the state of Nevada between $24 million and $34 million per year, decreasing schools' expenses far more than the decrease in revenues, thus creating a net gain for the school districts. </blockquote><br /><br />The article also shares findings from a similar study by the North Carolina Department of Non-Public Education, and points out that homeschoolers also save taxpayers money by not becoming prisoners (!). It's a good article, and not very long, so click over and read the whole thing. :)Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-66345323850604040662009-06-10T15:16:00.001-06:002009-06-10T15:17:54.437-06:00Field Guide to Homeschoolers?Dana over at Principled Discovery (incidentally, one of my favorite bloggers) is hosting the latest Carnival of Homeschooling: <a href="http://principleddiscovery.com/2009/06/09/field-guide-homeschoolers/">A Field Guide to Homeschoolers</a>. It's fun and there are TONS of great entries by dozens of different bloggers. Be sure to stop by and take a look!Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-51736408737820763812009-06-04T21:00:00.002-06:002009-06-04T21:15:59.876-06:00How To Teach Kids DiversityThere's a really excellent article over at Simply Catholic, entitled "<a href="http://simplycatholic.net/2009/06/04/racism-and-homeschooling/">Racism and Homeschooling</a>," that every homeschooler and public or private school educator needs to read. The author answers the criticism common to many anti-homeschoolers that only in a public school can kids really learn to appreciate diversity, and really be properly socialized, by pointing out how many better opportunities are available to homeschooling families. I've read a lot of posts and articles on socialization, but this one takes a unique angle in showing how homeschoolers can - and DO - teach our kids to appreciate and respect other cultures and races, far more effectively than what can happen in a classroom full of kids. The author concludes with a list of 10 ways you can teach your kids to appreciate other cultures, even if they don't live among them.<br /><br />Here's just a very small sample of the great material in that post:<br /><br /><blockquote>There is something about learning in school that just sucks the life out of anything exotic. Where are the smells of basil and curry? Where are the lilting tones of another language or music? Maybe you glimpse a foreign culture in a film-strip or an assembly? What unique cultural experience awaits the student within the walls of the classroom that can not be duplicated or improved in the home? Do not allow yourself to be fooled into thinking that just existing in a classroom with a child from Russia or Guatemala serves to immerse you in that culture. . . . When they are in class with you everyone is sitting in the same desks, looking at the same book, eating the same school lunch, taking the same standardized test and swinging on the same swing set at recess. Talking and interaction, learning about each other are NOT what school is about. The classroom couldn’t withstand that kind of interaction on a regular basis — I know I sat in one for 13 years.<br /><br />Now let me make a radical suggestion: I am purposing that the homeschool setting is actually more likely to expose the average child in the average community to different cultures, peoples and experiences than the school setting. I would suggest this even if it was not the parent’s intent to expose their children to different cultures, but if the parents value their children learning about different cultures in the least they can quickly and easily surpass even a good public school in this area.<br /><br />Schools have one huge disadvantage when it comes to immersing a child in the diversity of real life: they remove the child from real life. Children are segregated in schools by age, by ability and often by language. On top of this children then commonly segregate themselves by neighborhood affiliation, race, creed, or special interest. . . . Even in my rather homogeneous high-school the band geeks and chess club sat at one table, the jocks at another, the cheerleaders never mixed with the glee-club and the poor students and rich students sat on opposite sides of uncrossable divides. If you want to learn about segregation between races, creeds and class go to a public high-school. <br /></blockquote><br />Darcee has some great insights, many of which I've not seen before. It's a rather long post, but it's well worth reading - you'll be glad you did!Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-79908971237578984762009-06-04T14:50:00.006-06:002009-06-04T16:41:06.822-06:00A "Profound Shift"?There's been a lot of comment on homeschooling websites about the article in USA Today a few days ago entitled "<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2009-05-28-homeschooling_N.htm?plckFindCommentKey=CommentKey:7b564290-67e7-4c40-afa5-9daa456dea5a&loc=interstitialskip">Profound Shift in Kind of Families Who Are Homeschooling Their Children</a>." My biggest criticism of the article has to do with their use of U.S. Department of Education study recently released by the National Center for Education Statistics, "<a href="http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2009081">The Condition of Education 2009</a>." After having reviewed that study, it simply does not appear to support the claims in the first sentence of the USA Today article that "Parents who home-school children increasingly are white, wealthy and well-educated — and their numbers have nearly doubled in a decade."<br /><br />Here are some of the problems in that statement and in the reporter's support for it:<br /><br />1) The fact that "3.9% of white families homeschool, up from 2% in 1999," does not in fact mean that homeschoolers are increasingly white, but rather reflects the fact that the total number of homeschoolers has doubled since 1999. A review of <a href="http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2009/section1/indicator06.asp">additional material associated with the study </a>makes it clear that while the percentage of blacks who homeschool has declined over the years of the study, from 1% of black families to .8%, the percentage of Hispanics has increased from 1.1% to 1.5%, and the percentage of families of other races has increased from 1.9% to 3.4%. All this is not to deny that far more whites homeschool than those of other racial/ethnic groups; it is simply to point out that when the number of homeschoolers overall is increasing, an increase in the number of white homeschoolers does not mean a corresponding decrease in those of other races. Looking at the table further makes it clear: In 1999, 75.3% of homeschooling families were white; in 2003, 77% of homeschooling families were white; in 2007 (the year the most recent survey was done), 76.8% of homeschooling families were white. But because this distribution for each of these has a standard error of over 3%, this difference is not statistically significant; in other words, the 1999 number COULD have been as high as 78.6%, and the 2007 COULD have been as low as 73.5%. But of course, this would not have supported the reporter's contention that "homeschoolers are increasingly white" - because the study simply does not support that conclusion.<br /><br />2) The reporter's contention that "homeschoolers are increasingly . . . wealthy" is questionable because neither the article nor the study mention the effect of inflation on family income levels over the years between 1999 and 2007. <a href="http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2009/section1/indicator06.asp">The table </a>is quite clear that in 1999, 30.1% of homeschoolers had incomes below $25,000; 32.7% had incomes between $25,001 and $50,000; 19.1% had incomes between $50,001 and $75,000; and 17.4% had incomes over $75,001. In 2007, the distribution of homeschooling families had changed: only 15.9% had incomes below $25,000; 24.1% had incomes between $25,001 and $50,000; 26.8% had incomes between $50,001 and $75,000; and 33.2% had incomes over $75,000. That clearly represents a huge increase in income - but it's important to remember that during that time, the <a href="http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/dinctabs.html">median household income </a>increased from $38,885 to $50,233.<br /><br />In 1999, the <a href="http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/poverty.html">federal poverty threshold </a>for a family of 4 was $17,030; in 2007, it was $21,203. Thus, in 1999, many families who made under $25,000 who were not under the poverty level; by 2007, most families who made under $25,000 were. In 1999, many families who made less than $50,000 made more than the median income; by 2007, none did.<br /><br />The <a href="http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/dinctabs.html">median income for families </a>increased from $47,469 in 1999 (under $50,000) to $62,359 (halfway into the third group). These changes in income levels are obviously going to have a very significant effect on homeschoolers as well as the non-homeschooling population. I do see one trend that seems significant: there has been an increase in the homeschooling among those who make over $75,000 per year. This increase is greater than can be accounted for simply by inflation; it seems likely that as it has become clear that homeschoolers can do very well, those who make more money are willing to give it a try.<br /><br />The reporter, however, does not mention that increase as support for his contention. Instead, he uses this statistic: "In 1999, 63.6% of home-schooling families earned less than $50,000. Now 60.0% earn more than $50,000." In light of the above-mentioned increase in median family income, that change is exactly what would be expected if homeschooling families simply kept pace with the rest of the nation, and shows no increase at all in the "wealth" of families who are homeschooling.<br /><br />3) As for the contention that "homeschoolers are increasingly . . . well educated," the data in the study does not seem to support that well. Among those with a graduate or professional degree, homeschooling has actually declined since 1999. In 1999, 47.4% of homeschoolers had at least a bachelor's degree; in 2007, 49.9% did. This difference is not statistically significant. In 1999, 81.1% of homeschooling families had at least some college; in 2007, 86.3% of homeschooling families did - so if you consider "some college" to be "well educated," I suppose you might agree with the reporter's statement.<br /><br />Articles like these are frustrating, because the authors appear to be searching for data to support their own pre-drawn conclusions. On the other hand, Albert Mohler has a new article, drawn from the same study, that provides a much more solidly supported perspective. It's entitled, "<a href="http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=3875">A Major Force in Education</a>," and I encourage you to check it out. :) He points out some interesting, and some concerning, trends indicated by the report. Here's his conclusion:<br /><br /><blockquote>Education cannot be reduced to statistics, but the trends revealed in this new report from the Department of Education deserve close attention. In our day, education represents a clash of worldviews. Increasingly toxic approaches to education (or what is called education) drive many schools and many school systems. In that light, the fact that so many . . . parents are taking education into their own hands is a sign of hope. As this new report makes clear, we should expect homeschooling to be a growth industry in years ahead.<br /></blockquote>Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-77520523393695174442009-06-01T08:23:00.005-06:002009-06-01T09:06:05.856-06:00What Is Socialization All About?It's been forever since I've updated this blog, but lately some great stuff has been coming out and I have to post about it!<br /><br />One of the best articles I've ever seen on homeschooling and socialization (and after being in the homeschooling world for many years, I've seen quite a few!) was posted yesterday on <a href="http://www.justenoughblog.com/">Just Enough and Nothing More</a>. It's entitled, "<a href="http://www.justenoughblog.com/?p=1526">General Response to Homeschoolers: Do They Care Too Much?</a>" I haven't read the link to the original article; it sounds a little too frustrating for me to read today. But the author of the response post did her homework when she decided to homeschool, and her observations about homeschooled teens and families are fascinating.<br /><br />I've worked with groups of homeschooled kids for several years now. I'm currently working with two different groups of about 120 kids each, ranging in age from 5 to 18, helping administrate two different one-day-a-week enrichment programs. About 40 of our kids in each program are teens. Being a homeschooling mom myself, I'm always observing carefully the interactions of the teens, especially as my own daughters approach those years, and I find them to be exactly as the author of "Just Enough" describes them. Homeschooled teens are typical kids in many ways, but they are honest and accepting, and they care about each other. Generally speaking, they have decent relationships with their parents, they have good friendships, and they are kind to younger kids. They interact positively and comfortably with people of all different ages, including their own peers - something which is fairly uncommon among those teens who attend school. Not only that, but when they encounter people of different races or socioeconomic classes, they are far more accepting than most schooled kids I've seen.<br /><br />Obviously, some kids are better at this than others; there are those who struggle socially in any context. What's amazing is to see how a group of homeschooled teens can take in those who do struggle, accept them, and provide a positive opportunity for growth. In the case of one young man I know, he came to our group as an seventh-grader out of public school. He had had great difficulty socially in school; he was failing all his classes; and when he first came to our group he would sit all day hunched over, with his hoodie over his head. His mother was desperate. Within a few months, he was more positive, but throughout that first year he would often leave class and come sit sullenly at the office table. At the first parent-teacher conference of the second year, his parents came to our table with a question: "We don't understand - what do these grades mean?" They were just typical letter grades - but the young man had all A's and B's, and his parents couldn't believe it! They went to his teachers to thank them, but the teachers knew and stated clearly - it wasn't them, it was the other kids, who had come around the young man, had supported and encouraged him, and had gently shaped his behavior to be more socially appropriate. During the second year, he never came to our office table any more, and the hoodie had been left behind while he interacted with his friends. And at the end of this past year, this young man got multiple awards, including one for "Most Improved in Drama," and the High Honor Roll - he had discovered that not only did he have friends, but he was quite gifted in acting, and he had earned straight A's all year! All this, primarily because his peers had accepted and believed in him, and had helped him become more than he could otherwise have been. How likely is it, honestly, that this young man would have achieved this kind of positive result if he'd been in a regular school setting?<br /><br />Now that my older daughter is almost 13, I have to agree with the author's assessment of homeschooled teens. I am so pleased with how my daughter gets along with others. She contributes very positively to our family; she loves her younger sister and (while of course getting very annoyed by her at times) spends time reading to and interacting with her; she impresses the adults around her by her friendliness and maturity; she goes into nursing homes to perform for them or polish their nails, and is friendly and kind to them; and she has many good friends she loves to email or talk with by cell phone or go to movies with or learn to do archery from. She's consistent in her schoolwork and loves to practice her piano, flute, and cello; she studies hard, plays hard, generally sleeps well, and is pretty satisfied with her life for a junior higher. She is an all-around healthy young lady, and I'm not at all sure she would be at such a positive place in her life if she'd been in school all these years.<br /><br />The post linked above describes how many of the homeschooled teens the author observed are much like those I've known, and it is excellent. It's not terribly long, and well worth reading the whole thing.Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-22348499284934874882008-08-21T10:58:00.003-06:002008-08-21T11:03:58.220-06:00The Truth About What School Can Be LikeMany of us have pink-tinted memories of our experiences in school. We have a tendency to think back affectionately on the people we knew and cared about, and to forget the painful situations that often arose.<br /><br />Dana over at <a href="http://principleddiscovery.com/">Principled Discovery </a>has had the courage to tell the truth about what school was like for her. She generally says she had a positive school experience - but when she thought back to what she had learned in school, there was a lot of pain stored there. Her post is called, "<a href="http://principleddiscovery.com/2008/08/21/homeschool-stereotypes-vs-public-school-realities/">Homeschool stereotypes vs. public school realities</a>," and it's worth reading all the way through. The lessons she learned in school reflect, to a large extent, what public school "socialization" really involves; and they ought to stimulate each of us to think seriously about what kind of socialization we really want our kids to have. I know one thing - the things she learned are not the things I want my kids to learn. That's why I homeschool.<br /><br />One of these days maybe I'll get up the nerve to write about my own experience in school as a child. I hope my kids will have much better childhood experiences to write about someday.Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-50337811896405017262008-08-21T10:29:00.003-06:002008-08-21T10:32:58.070-06:00Great Homeschooling LinksThis morning I discovered a website with an amazing number of top-notch links for homeschoolers. From organization and forms to free online books; from SAT prep to online math games; from foreign language to a clickable mummy - this site has it ALL! And almost every link is free. I must have bookmarked 20 sites from links I followed from this site, and I haven't even gotten to the bottom yet. <br /><br />The post goes by the unassuming title, "Lots of Links to Help Homeschoolers," and here's the link:<br /><br /><a href="http://harmonyhealth.wordpress.com/2008/08/20/lots-of-links-to-help-home-schoolers/">http://harmonyhealth.wordpress.com/2008/08/20/lots-of-links-to-help-home-schoolers/</a><br /><br />Enjoy!Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-10175518074971470052008-08-15T08:26:00.002-06:002008-08-15T08:45:29.030-06:00Homeschoolers Transitioning to Public SchoolsNot every homeschooler chooses to continue homeschooling throughout their child's school years. As a result, a significant question arises: what does it take for a family to have a successful transition from homeschool to public school? A doctoral student at the University of Missouri did his dissertation on the topic, and recently Milton Gaither reviewed it on his blog, <a href="http://gaither.wordpress.com/">Homeschooling Research Notes</a>, in a post entitled, "<a href="http://gaither.wordpress.com/2008/08/07/koonce-on-transitioning-from-home-school-to-public-school/">Koonce on Transitioning from Home School to Public School</a>."<br /><br />Koonce's research was admittedly based on a very small sample of 13 Missouri families who agreed to be interviewed. That's too bad, because his conclusions are fascinating, and it would be helpful to have more statistics to confirm what he found. I hope someone will undertake further research on this topic. From Dr. Gaither's post:<br /><br /><blockquote>What made the transition positive or negative? Positive experiences resulted when the school system was helpful and understanding of the student’s background (4 students in his sample). Negative experiences resulted either when the school was skeptical of the child’s homeschooling background (5 students) or when the homeschooling background had not adequately prepared the child academically (2), socially (1), or procedurally (1).</blockquote><br /><br />In short, the single most significant factor in the students' successful transition, found in at least 9 of the 13 cases, was the school's perception of homeschooling. If the school was "understanding of the student's background," the transition was generally positive. If the school was "skeptical of the child's homeschooling background," the transition was generally negative. Given the overwhelming prevalence of negative attitudes toward homeschooling on the part of so many people involved in the public education system, this is unfortunate. <br /><br />It is also clear from these results that's it's important for parents to make sure children are prepared for the transition. Two of the 13 families had negative experiences because the children were not prepared academically; this is sad given the innate advantages of homeschooling. The single negative experience due to social factors is probably less significant, since it could be argued that at least one of every 13 kids is going to struggle socially regardless of their educational background.<br /><br />In the end, according to Gaither, Koonce offers some practical suggestions:<br /><br /><blockquote>Koonce ends his study with some practical suggestions both for homeschooling parents and for public schools to help ease the transition. Homeschoolers should make sure their curriculum is sound, that they keep good records, that their kids take “an anual nationally normed test” and that they have “a positive mindset toward public education.” Public schools should recognize homeschooling as a normal and legitimate educational option, provide a user-friendly enrollment process and mechanism for giving homeschoolers credit for academic work done at home, tap into the energy of the involved homeschooling parent-type, provide a liason to help students with the transition, and encourage part-time enrollment as a first step for those who need it.</blockquote><br /><br />While I think homeschooling is a great option, and I believe many kids would benefit from homeschooling all the way through high school, there are many who will eventually end up in the public school system. Parents send kids back to school for many reasons, including the difficulty of the subject matter as they get older. Art, band, sports, and drama all draw families back to the school system. And because kids are going to go back to the schools, it's important that more research be done on the topic of this transition, both for the sake of the schools and for the children's sake. I hope someone undertakes a much more comprehensive study of these issues.Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-74527553871840464142008-08-12T08:24:00.003-06:002008-08-12T08:40:02.466-06:00What Americans Think About HomeschoolingThere's a fascinating article on yesterday's MarketWatch website. It's entitled, "<a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/homeschooling-constitutional-right-americans-tell/story.aspx?guid={5DA0295F-8F72-4422-B9B2-DD8B7BFED726}&dist=hppr">Homeschooling a Constitutional Right, Americans Tell LifeWay Research</a>," and it shows that in fact the majority of Americans do believe that parents have a constitutional right to homeschool.<br /><br /><blockquote>The California appeals court shocked the nation with its ruling in February," said Ed Stetzer, director of LifeWay Research. "We decided, as part of a broad survey of more than 1,200 adult Americans, to get their reaction and found that 61 percent strongly agreed that the Constitution guarantees the right of parents to homeschool, and another 25 percent agreed somewhat." Eight percent somewhat disagreed, five percent disagreed strongly, and two percent did not know, according to Stetzer. "Americans appear to believe that parents, not the government, should decide whether or not they should homeschool." </blockquote><br />This is surprising, and demonstrates a profound change in perspective about homeschooling among society as a whole over the last 25 years or so. Back in the 80's, homeschooling was little-known, and many people thought it was a strange thing to do. Oh, a few people did it - the University of Nebraska, for example, even allowed kids to earn a high school diploma through independent study (I know, I got mine that way!). But mostly it was reserved to the fringes and to the exceptional situation: farm kids, missionary kids, kids with sicknesses that kept them out of school for long periods, and so on.<br /><br />It speaks very well of the homeschooling community that since the 1980's homeschooling has become, not only accepted among the general population, but a constitutional right. This can only be the result of many dedicated homeschooling parents working exceptionally hard to show that homeschooling can in fact be as good a way of educating kids as any other schooling.<br /><br />However, we still have our work cut out for us in demonstrating that homeschooling not only provides a good education, but also excellent social skills.<br /><br /><blockquote>Many have expressed concern that homeschooling fails to provide adequate socialization and connection to broader society, often leading to weaker social interaction and skills. In the LifeWay Research survey, 54 percent of respondents agreed, somewhat or strongly, that "children who are homeschooled often lack social skills." </blockquote><br />Remember, this is a <strong>perception</strong>, not reality. The general public <strong>thinks</strong> homeschoolers often lack social skills. It's up to us, as homeschooling parents, to help change this belief on the part of ordinary people, and the best way I can think of is to train our kids, very carefully and deliberately, in social skills. Manners, etiquette, kindness, consideration - these things must be taught on purpose and consistently. We spend large portions of our time with our kids; we have the chance to observe them regularly. It's critical that we observe our kids' behavior and their interactions with others, and that we correct them for inappropriate social interaction. The more we do this, the more likely it is that our kids will grow up to respond correctly in social situations.<br /><br />It's encouraging to see that our culture is beginning to recognize the value of homeschooling, and the right of parents to educate children as they believe is best for them. And as we consistently raise children who contradict the general opinion about socialization, that misperception will also fall by the wayside, and people will see the truth about how good homeschooling can be for kids.Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-75312095875353006792008-08-07T10:04:00.003-06:002008-08-07T10:26:11.831-06:00The Ultimate Homeschool EnvironmentMy Google alert today brought up a post from IEducation called, "<a href="http://www.theieducation.com/2008/08/05/6-creative-ways-to-create-the-ultimate-home-schooling-environment/">6 Effective Ways to Create the Ultimate Homeschooling Environment</a>." It's a pretty short post, and it has some decent ideas, but the more I read, the more frustrated I felt with it. So I decided to add a comment, and write my own post on the topic.<br /><br />The post begins with this:<br /><br /><blockquote>Many people are now into <a class="kLink" oncontextmenu="return false;" id="KonaLink0" onmouseover="adlinkMouseOver(event,this,0);" style="POSITION: static; TEXT-DECORATION: underline! important" onclick="adlinkMouseClick(event,this,0);" onmouseout="adlinkMouseOut(event,this,0);" href="http://www.theieducation.com/2008/08/05/6-creative-ways-to-create-the-ultimate-home-schooling-environment/#" target="_top">homeschooling</a> these days for whatever reason. It is important to design a classroom environment so the kids can feel as though they are at a <a class="kLink" oncontextmenu="return false;" id="KonaLink1" onmouseover="adlinkMouseOver(event,this,1);" style="POSITION: static; TEXT-DECORATION: underline! important" onclick="adlinkMouseClick(event,this,1);" onmouseout="adlinkMouseOut(event,this,1);" href="http://www.theieducation.com/2008/08/05/6-creative-ways-to-create-the-ultimate-home-schooling-environment/#" target="_top">school</a>. </blockquote><br />I should have known right away it wasn't going to be very helpful to me. You see, I don't believe homeschooling ought to be duplicating school at home. Homeschooling has many advantages and uniquenesses, and it seems to me we ought to take advantage of those. I've been homeschooling for 8 years now, and I'm pretty happy with our "homeschooling environment."<br /><br />The author goes on to list the following "tips to create a perfect study environment."<br /><br />1. Dedicated space.<br /><br /><blockquote>Keep distractions away from the study area. No TV, no XBox, PS3, or any other gaming device. This is a time to learn and study. Keep it clean so the children will be ready to begin as they enter their home classroom.</blockquote><br />Dedicated space? Not at our house! We use the whole house, the back yard, the neighborhood. As far as I'm concerned, homeschooling is LIFE! And learning is a part of life. Our favorite place to "do school" is the living room couch, but my kids use their beds, the floor in the family room, the outside swing - anywhere they want as long as they get their work done right. That said, we don't put on the TV during the school day, unless it's at lunchtime (and then it has to be educational videos, readily available from the library if you don't have them at home). My kids have learned to ask at lunchtime (even during the summer!), "Do we have any 'school' videos?"<br /><br />2. Equipment Purchases.<br /><br /><blockquote>Large white board. The <a class="kLink" oncontextmenu="return false;" id="KonaLink2" onmouseover="adlinkMouseOver(event,this,2);" style="POSITION: static; TEXT-DECORATION: underline! important" onclick="adlinkMouseClick(event,this,2);" onmouseout="adlinkMouseOut(event,this,2);" href="http://www.theieducation.com/2008/08/05/6-creative-ways-to-create-the-ultimate-home-schooling-environment/#" target="_top">teaching</a> parent will use this frequently to show examples of<br />discussed topics.<br />One small <a class="kLink" oncontextmenu="return false;" id="KonaLink3" onmouseover="adlinkMouseOver(event,this,3);" style="POSITION: static; TEXT-DECORATION: underline! important" onclick="adlinkMouseClick(event,this,3);" onmouseout="adlinkMouseOut(event,this,3);" href="http://www.theieducation.com/2008/08/05/6-creative-ways-to-create-the-ultimate-home-schooling-environment/#" target="_top">student</a> desk per child, or use a table for multiple students<br />Computer, an absolute must. A PC or Mac is needed to keep your child(ren) abreast of the latest technologies. Many <a class="kLink" oncontextmenu="return false;" id="KonaLink4" onmouseover="adlinkMouseOver(event,this,4);" style="POSITION: static; TEXT-DECORATION: underline! important" onclick="adlinkMouseClick(event,this,4);" onmouseout="adlinkMouseOut(event,this,4);" href="http://www.theieducation.com/2008/08/05/6-creative-ways-to-create-the-ultimate-home-schooling-environment/#" target="_top">educational programs</a> are available online. Have your child(ren) involved in the selection of furniture and or equipment. They will take pride in their decisions and respect the condition of the particular items.</blockquote><br />The only part of this I use is the computer and educational programs. I do have a couple of small white boards, which the kids mostly use; but if I need to diagram or illustrate something that's not already shown in a book we're using, a piece of paper is usually easier to use than a white board, and it's more readily available (we don't have to go to our "schoolroom" to use it). My kids do each have a desk, but they use their desks only occasionally.<br /><br />3. Organization.<br /><br /><blockquote>The parent and child(ren) need to stay organized. Keep record of books distributed, homework assignments, completed work, progress, and grades.</blockquote><br />Here I agree absolutely! We don't do homework assignments, and we don't have a lot of grades, so I don't keep track of those. But without organization, your homeschool will fall apart - and your kids won't be able to find those wonderful educational supplies you've spent so much time and money on. Invest in some tools to help you stay organized, because you're going to have a lot more "supplies" than a household that sends their kids to school. A cabinet or drawer unit for holding art supplies is the most significant thing I can think of, along with plenty of bookshelves. You will also have educational games and toys you'll accumulate over time, and you'll need a way to store those. But don't buy them all at once - get what you need for this year, and keep an eye out for sales. As your supply of resources builds, you'll want to invest in more.<br /><br />Get yourself a good planner, too. Keep track of the records your state requires, either in files or in your binder or planner. And definitely write down books you loan out, and when and to whom they were loaned - you may think you'll remember, but you won't! :) Have a special basket, box, or shelf for library books, too, so they don't get mixed in with the rest of your books - and let your kids know if they don't return books to the basket, they are responsible for any fines!<br /><br />4. Motivation.<br /><br /><blockquote>Encourage your child(ren) with their studies and reward them for great<br />accomplishments.</blockquote><br />I think the best way to motivate your kids is to show them you are learning right along with them. Use real books, preferably written by one author, rather than textbooks and workbooks, whenever you can. Textbooks are written by committee, and are therefore usually dull. But when you read a real book - whether historical fiction, biography, science, or literature - there is always something new to learn. Field trips, experiments, books on tape - all of these can teach us as homeschooling parents as well. And as the kids watch us being excited about learning, they get excited and motivated as well. At the same time, you can never go wrong with encouragement, or with reward big accomplishments (a tough math page ought to deserve at least a hug or a sticker or something!). :)<br /><br />5. Syllabus.<br /><br /><br /><blockquote>Go beyond what is required by your local government or Board of <a class="kLink" oncontextmenu="return false;" id="KonaLink5" onmouseover="adlinkMouseOver(event,this,5);" style="POSITION: static; TEXT-DECORATION: underline! important" onclick="adlinkMouseClick(event,this,5);" onmouseout="adlinkMouseOut(event,this,5);" href="http://www.theieducation.com/2008/08/05/6-creative-ways-to-create-the-ultimate-home-schooling-environment/#" target="_top">Education</a>. Take trips to your local library and let the<br />child(ren) select or suggest a few categories from which they have to choose.</blockquote><br /><br />The syllabus sounds like a lot of extra work to me, unless your state requires it. I do plan my kids' work, but I think a formal syllabus is a waste of time and prevents spontaneity. Instead, I spend that time and energy trying to find interesting, motivating materials and resources to help my kids learn. As for library books, suggesting categories is not a bad idea; I don't seem to need it, since my kids love to read. I'm also the primary person in my family looking for library books; I borrow dozens to read aloud or recommend to the kids when we are at home. (Usually I try to request them online before we go, so I can just pick mine up at the desk when we get there.)<br /><br />6. Field trips.<br /><br /><blockquote>These are always fun adventures for the child(ren). Depending on your location, select venues where you can apply their studies with the community or regional activities.</blockquote><br />Absolutely! I try to plan a number of relevant field trips every year. And even a trip to the grocery store can be a field trip, especially with little people (try a new fruit or vegetable each time, or point out different shapes, or have them help you figure out which size container is least expensive; there are a thousand things they can learn there - and it keeps them busy while you're shopping!).<br /><br />I think if you want to have the "ultimate homeschooling environment," though, you will want to make your whole home a learning center. Obviously it's not financially possible for most of us to invest a large sum in "extras" all at once, but over the years, you will want to accumulate all kinds of things that will make your home a great place to learn. Here are some ideas:<br /><br />Art supplies - as many different things as you can think of. Don't invest a lot if your kids are little - buy discounted things at the beginning of the school year when you can. Crayons, colored pencils, markers, watercolors, modeling clay (purchased or homemade), construction paper, cardstock, poster board, finger paints, stencils, foam shapes, glue sticks, white glue - these are all good for little guys. As they get older, you may want to invest in oil pastels, better quality colored pencils, charcoal, drawing pencils, watercolor pencils, acrylic paints, Plaster of Paris, and different kinds of paper for the different media.<br /><br />Tapes or CD's - There are so many of these! Books on tape are fun; so are radio programs such as Adventures in Odyssey and Focus On the Family Radio Theater. And then there are the educational ones - geography songs, multiplication songs, Spanish songs, dramatized versions of American history, and more. These days many of these are on CD. Also be sure to invest in a good tape or CD player; if your kids are like mine, it will get hard use and you'll likely have to replace it fairly often.<br /><br />Educational games and toys - I prefer the non-computerized educational games. We enjoy the Cranium series of games, but many of the Milton Bradley and Hasbro games also have educational value in the early years. Discovery Toys has some really excellent games, too, even for older kids. Puzzles of all sizes and types are fun and educational; so are building toys such as Legos, Magnetix, and K'Nex. Speed Stacks cups are also fun and increase eye-hand coordination.<br /><br />Sports equipment - To encourage physical fitness skills, you'll want a basketball (or several), a soccer ball, some cones to mark out a playing field or at least a goal, a football, a playground ball (or several), a bat and baseball, and a bike. You may also want a badminton set, a volleyball set, a croquet set, golf clubs, tennis rackets and balls, and more.<br /><br />Educational "tools" - My kids think these are toys, because we don't use them often for our formal "school" time. We like pattern blocks, Cuisenaire rods, geoboards (these use rubber bands on pegs to make shapes), counting bears, 3-D shapes, and attribute blocks.<br /><br />Books - Books, books, books! Biographies, historical fiction, Usborne books, science experiment books, classic literature, Caldecott and Newbery Award books, picture books - you name it! Surround your kids with books, and read aloud every day so they begin to grasp what's in those books, and you are likely to end up with committed readers and learners for life.<br /><br />One caution - DON'T try to do all of this at once! I've been homeschooling for 8 years, and an at-home mom for 12, and we have built up our supply gradually. I remember as a new homeschooler reading about this kind of environment and feeling totally inadequate because I just didn't have the budget for it. But the key is to do it slowly, but consistently. Choose a few things that fit your child at his or her age, and get those "for school." Then keep your eyes and ears open. Attend used book sales; watch for books, toys, and games at garage sales; pay attention to sale flyers. Get these kinds of things for birthdays and Christmas (and ask friends and relatives to do the same) rather than battery-operated dolls and the latest fads. Choose quality over quantity whenever you can.<br /><br />Keep in mind that what your family needs is to some extent going to depend on who your family is. Your learning environment will be different from mine, or most likely from everyone else you know. The key, to my way of thinking, is to begin with the philosophy that you want your kids to grow up believing that learning is a way of life, and that it's fun - and to keep that philosophy in mind whenever you are shopping. If you choose carefully and stay consistent, eventually your home will be "the ultimate learning environment" for your kids.Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-140532386359315902008-08-06T11:00:00.003-06:002008-08-06T11:09:59.122-06:00Feminism and HomeschoolingThere's an interesting blog entry this morning over at Kittywampus entitled, "<a href="http://kittywampus.blogspot.com/2008/08/feminist-homeschooling-why-i-dont.html">Feminist Homeschooling - Why I Don't</a>." I've heard a lot of arguments against homeschooling, but this one is new to me, and I find her thought process interesting. <br /><br />As you know if you read my blog, I'm not exactly an avid feminist; still, I believe true feminism means advocating for a woman's right to make choices that are important to her, without being pressured by the culture around her. In that sense, I AM a feminist - though perhaps many feminists would disown me because I believe that in many cases conservative values are better for women than "progressive" values. I think women ought to be able to make their own choices, based on what is really important - if that means they choose to work, fine; if it means they choose to stay at home, that's fine too.<br /><br />I'm especially interested in Kittywampus' reasoning for why women should work. She says about stay-at-home, homeschooling mothers,<br /><br /><blockquote>If she works from home for pay, she rarely earns enough to survive financially if her marriage or partnership were to end.</blockquote><br />And,<br /><br /><blockquote>I see lots of female students hoping to be stay-at-home parents without much awareness of the attendant risk of poverty, and I suspect many mothers decide to stay home with the assumption that divorce or widowhood won't strike them personally.<br /></blockquote><br />The question that comes to mind is this: are we feminists simply out of fear? My feminism is rooted in the belief that women should have the freedom to make choices in which we find fulfillment and satisfaction, rather than being locked into something we don't want to do just because men want us to do it. But it sounds to me like she's saying the opposite: women shouldn't have the freedom to do what we find fulfillment in, if it means we might be dependent on the men in our lives, because if those men should fail, we will be in serious trouble. We should follow the current cultural pattern and go to work so we will have a "safety net" in case our husbands should walk out on us.<br /><br />Do we really want to make our choices based fear that the men in our lives might not follow through on their commitments? That's not the kind of life I choose. Instead, I married someone I was pretty sure I could trust, and we each made a willing commitment to the other. If he chooses not to follow through on his commitment to me, then certainly, there will be consequences in my life - just as there would be in his life if I chose not to follow through on my commitment to him.<br /><br />All relationships are like that. Even in working relationships, there are costs if people don't follow through (suppose my boss should suddenly decide to stop paying me!). But if we choose to live our lives in fear, rather than in trust, we'll never find real contentment or satisfaction - whether we are working or staying at home.<br /><br />My own feminism pushes me to make choices I believe are right for me as a woman - choices that bring me fulfillment and satisfaction. In my case, those choices include staying home with my children and homeschooling. I'm well aware there would be serious consequences if my husband chose to flake out (with life insurance, there would be fewer economic consequences if he died - in fact, we would probably be better off financially than we are now). But I'm not going to let my fear force me into getting a job I don't want, so I can live a pressured, harried lifestyle while someone else who cares less about them than I do raises and educates my kids.<br /><br />That said, I do work part-time, one day a week, in the homeschooling enrichment program my kids are also enrolled in. Over the 12 years I've been home with my kids, I've worked a variety of work-from-home or part-time jobs, just to keep up my skills, and figuring that someday when the kids are gone I will work again to pay college bills and provide for our retirement.<br /><br />And I'm pretty happy with my life. I have adult interaction in my work, at church, at homeschooling events, online, and in other social situations. I love interacting with my kids and being there to see the sparkle in their eyes when they "get it"! I love the way we've gone from the conflict of the preschool and early elementary years to true enjoyment in being together (and how many parents of a middle-schooler can say that?!). I love the way my kids have had to learn to get along, because they are each other's only playmates. I love sitting on the couch together reading a good story, going to the museum as a family rather than with 30 other kids, and taking a day off to go swimming or do something special "just because." I love sharing my excitement over a given time in history or a science concept or a great book. I love seeing my junior higher begin to adopt the values that are important to me, and to ask questions that show she's thinking about significant issues in her life.<br /><br />I refuse to allow fear to rob me of that kind of fulfillment. I choose to trust, with full awareness of the possible consequences. And if my husband should choose not to follow through, I will then make the choices I believe are right for me as a woman under those circumstances. My belief in a woman's freedom - my feminism, if you will - demands nothing less.Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-47627346796476916762008-07-29T08:58:00.002-06:002008-07-29T10:48:49.362-06:00More on Public EducationYesterday's Wall Street Journal has an excellent article on the topic of public education, entitled "<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121720068489088381.html?mod=most_viewed_day">The Greatest Scandal</a>." In an effort to point out the differences between our candidates for President, the article highlights how school vouchers and privately-run public schools are improving education drastically for those students who are able to take advantage of them.<br /><br />In Washington, D.C., for example, the Opportunity Scholarship Program provides parents of disadvantaged children with up to $7,500 to attend private schools. This is in fact a huge savings to the government, since <a href="https://ask.census.gov/cgi-bin/askcensus.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=517&p_created=1086812514&p_sid=&p_accessibility=&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPSZwX3NvcnRfYnk9JnBfZ3JpZHNvcnQ9JnBfcm93X2NudD0mcF9wcm9kcz0mcF9jYXRzPSZwX3B2PSZwX2N2PSZwX3BhZ2U9MQ**&p_li=&p_topview=1&p_search_text=education%20spending">the District of Columbia spends $13,446 per student per year</a>. According the WSJ article,<br /><br /><blockquote>To qualify, a child must live in a family with a household income below 185% of the poverty level. Some 1,900 children participate; 99% are black or Hispanic. Average annual income is just over $22,000 for a family of four.</blockquote><br /><br />These people are obviously needy - exactly the kind of kids who fall through the cracks in many public schools today. But as the WSJ article points out,<br /><br /><blockquote>A recent Department of Education report found nearly 90% of participants in the D.C. program have higher reading scores than peers who didn't receive a scholarship. There are five applicants for every opening.</blockquote><br /><br />This is a program that is working! So are our leaders jumping at the chance to duplicate this kind of success rate? Unfortunately, the answer is no. Instead, they are instead refusing the reauthorize the program. <br /><br />The article also mentions the phenomenal success rate of EdisonLearning in Philadelphia, which in 2002 took over 20 of the city's 45 worst-performing schools. <br /><br /><blockquote>The number of students performing at grade level or higher in reading at the schools managed by private providers increased by 6.1% overall compared to 3.3% in district-managed schools. In math, the results for Edison and other outside managers was 4.6% and 6.0%, respectively, compared to 3.1% in the district-run schools.</blockquote><br /><br />Wow - another program that is working! But again, the powers that be, instead of rushing to duplicate this kind of success, are trying to shut it down. "Last month, Philadelphia's school reform commission voted to seize six schools from outside managers, including four from Edison."<br /><br />The WSJ article concludes with this:<br /><blockquote>Mr. Obama told an interviewer recently that he opposes school choice because, "although it might benefit some kids at the top, what you're going to do is leave a lot of kids at the bottom." The Illinois Senator has it exactly backward. Those at the top don't need voucher programs and they already exercise school choice. They can afford exclusive private schools, or they can afford to live in a neighborhood with decent public schools. The point of providing educational options is to extend this freedom to the "kids at the bottom."<br /><br />A visitor to Mr. Obama's Web site finds plenty of information about his plans to fix public education in this country. Everyone knows this is a long, hard slog, but Mr. Obama and his wife aren't waiting. Their daughters attend the private University of Chicago Laboratory Schools, where annual tuition ranges from $15,528 for kindergarten to $20,445 for high school.<br /></blockquote><br />So just exactly why does Mr. Obama think it's fine for him to have school choice - choice that costs him almost as much as our family makes in a year - but not for the rest of us? <br /><br />School choice promotes competition, which almost always results in a better end product than a monopoly. In Colorado, open enrollment has allowed students some measure of school choice since 1994, and has been pretty effective; however, options are limited to public and charter schools, parents are responsible for transporting students to open-enrollment choices, and the best schools fill up quickly, often from within their own attendance areas.<br /><br />But when we study the reality of what happens when families get real choices in education, we discover that, just as was true in Washington, D.C., choice means improvement. The <a href="http://www.acescholarships.org/schoolchoice/choice_works.asp">Alliance for Choice in Education</a> offers scholarships for children from needy families in Denver to attend private schools - and those students have a 95% graduation rate (in spite of the fact that 78% of their scholarship recipients have a household income of under $30,000/year, and the families are required to contribute half of the private school tuition!). Not only that, but students in these programs in Cleveland and Milwaukee, where school vouchers are widely used, show significant improvements in reading and math (between 7 and 15 points higher in their percentile ranking from their own previous scores). <br /><br />So what's the conclusion? As might be expected, increased competition means improved schools. I am aware of no studies that show what happens to public school test scores when competition is introduced (via charter schools, open enrollment, school vouchers, or privately-run public schools). Admittedly, this might be difficult to determine, since the competition would undoubtedly "skim" some of the better students from the public schools; still, it would be interesting to see what heppens. It would also be interesting to see the results of school choice on individual students. (We may someday be able to see these results, as the <a href="http://www.uark.edu/ua/der/SCDP/Milwaukee_Eval/Report_5.pdf">Milwaukee Longitudinal Educational Growth Study has just released its "Baseline Report"</a> - perhaps 10-15 years in the future we'll be able to tell whether students in school voucher programs in fact show greater improvement in their test scores and in their success rates in life.) But given what we know now, state and local governments across the nation ought to be looking to increase competition in order to improve performance for all schools.Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-86743563495946053382008-07-25T10:01:00.003-06:002008-07-25T12:16:32.271-06:00Do We Need a New Federal Policy in Education?Many people have written criticizing NCLB - the No Child Left Behind Act. I have my own criticisms of that act, which I will not go into here. <br /><br />But the Forum for Education Reform has produced a 72-page report entitled "<a href="http://www.forumforeducation.org/upload_files/files/FED_ReportRevised415.pdf">Democracy At Risk: The Need for a New Federal Policy in Education</a>." In that report, they propose to increase federal spending on education by $29 billion per year. Considering that 2008 federal spending on education amounts to <a href="http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/upload/FederalSpendingByTheNumbers2008.pdf">something over $67 billion</a>, that's a pretty hefty increase - 43%. <br /><br />Among their evidence in support of the "need" for this, you'll find this statement:<br /><blockquote>By the mid-1970s, achievement had improved, college-going rates for African American and Hispanic students were equivalent to those for white students, and teacher shortages had been nearly eliminated. The United States led the world in education.<br /><br />However, many of these initiatives were ended in the 1980s and the gains lost when the federal share of education spending was sharply cut in half. Although modest progress was made in the 1990s, other countries have surged ahead with strategic investments in systems that promote top-flight teaching for higher-order skills in every school.</blockquote><br />You'll forgive me if I'm a bit skeptical of this position on American education in the mid-70's. In <a href="http://salempress.com/store/samples/seventies_in_america/seventies_in_america_education_in_the_united_states.htm">this sample chapter from Salem Press' book, <em>The Seventies in America</em></a>, the education scene during the 1970's does not look nearly as positive as the Forum for Education Reform would suggest. This was the decade of forced busing, "white flight," court-ordered equalization (meaning the court required that there be no more than $100 difference in spending between public school districts) and open classrooms. By 1975, according to this link, "reports showed that scores on the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT), used as a college entrance examination, had dropped dramatically since the previous decade." And this in spite of the fact that <a href="http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2003/2003006.pdf">federal spending on education between 1965 and 1975 had increased by 207%</a>! The final sentence in the chapter from the Salem Press book is: "Concern over apparently dropping test scores and over the quality of American education began to grow." Does this sound to you like the Forum for Education Reform's description of the mid-1970's in American education? (Oh, and by the way - until 1979 there WAS no U.S. Department of Education - so if the United States in fact "led the world in education" during the mid-70's, perhaps we ought to ask ourselves whether the federalization of American education might have had something to do with the decline in our schools.)<br /><br />The Democracy At Risk report goes on to say that "the federal share of education spending was cut in half" during the 1980's. However, a more rational look at the situation is provided by the National Center for Education Statistics' report, entitled "<a href="http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2003/2003006.pdf">Federal Support for Education: Fiscal Years 1980 to 2002.</a>" On page 3 of this report, the most significant drop in education spending between 1980 and 1985 is reported in this sentence: "During this same time period, elementary and secondary education funds dropped 21 percent, after adjusting for inflation." And between 1985 and 1990, spending on elementary and secondary inflation actually increased 12 percent. <br /><br />As for the Democracy At Risk report's "modest progress" during the 1990's, on-budget education spending for elementary and secondary education increased 87% between 1990 and 2002; "off-budget support and nonfederal funds generated by federal legislation" increased 281%. If this is modest, I wonder what it would take for them to consider a funding increase "substantial"! Federal spending on education has continued to increase throughout the 6 years since 2002.<br /><br />But for the Forum for Education Reform, we are still not spending enough federal money on education. In fact, on page 27 of "Democracy At Risk," they spend an entire page praising the Finnish system, which provides teacher candidates with a 3-year graduate degree in education, paid for entirely (including room and board) by the Finnish government. And while I would agree that it appears the Finnish system has produced excellent results, raising Finland to the very top of the heap in international comparisons, the cost has been extremely high. While in the United States our <a href="http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxfreedomday/">2008 Tax Freedom Day</a> was April 23 (meaning the average American has to work until that date just to pay our taxes), <a href="http://diadelcontribuyente.org/en/ccaa.php">in Finland they did not hit theirs until June 5</a>. That means the average Finnish worker pays almost half his/her income in taxes!<br /><br />There must be a better way to improve America's education system than just throwing more money at it. The <a href="https://ask.census.gov/cgi-bin/askcensus.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=517&p_created=1086812514&p_sid=&p_accessibility=&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPSZwX3NvcnRfYnk9JnBfZ3JpZHNvcnQ9JnBfcm93X2NudD0mcF9wcm9kcz0mcF9jYXRzPSZwX3B2PSZwX2N2PSZwX3BhZ2U9MQ**&p_li=&p_topview=1&p_search_text=education%20spending">U.S. Census Bureau provides the following information </a>on per-pupil spending in different states:<br /><blockquote>School district spending per pupil was highest in New York ($14,884), followed by New Jersey ($14,630) and the District of Columbia ($13,446). States where school districts spent the lowest amount per pupil were Utah ($5,437), Idaho ($6,440) and Arizona ($6,472). (<a href="http://ftp2.census.gov/govs/school/06f33pub.pdf">More info here</a>.)</blockquote><br />But the amount spent per-pupil does not appear closely related to the likelihood that a state's young people <a href="http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ThematicMapFramesetServlet?_bm=y&-_MapEvent=zoom&-errMsg=&-_useSS=N&-_dBy=040&-redoLog=false&-_zoomLevel=10&-tm_name=DEC_2000_SF3_U_M00160&-tm_config=b=50l=ent=403zf=0.0ms=thm_defdw=10.212355884000878dh=5.973336916445812dt=gov.census.aff.domain.map.EnglishMapExtentif=gifcx=-79.19317572220642cy=38.03069711339602zl=8pz=8bo=bl=ft=350:349:335:389:388:332:331fl=403:381:204:380:369:379:368g=01000USds=DEC_2000_SF3_Usb=50tud=falsedb=040mn=60mx=88.3cc=1cm=1cn=5cb=um=Percentpr=1th=DEC_2000_SF3_U_M00160sf=Nsg=&-PANEL_ID=tm_result&-_pageY=&-_lang=en&-geo_id=01000US&-_pageX=&-_mapY=&-_mapX=&-_latitude=&-_pan=&-ds_name=DEC_2000_SF3_U&-_longitude=&-_changeMap=Identify">will graduate from high school</a>. Utah, which spent the least on education, had the second highest rate for high school graduation (88%), while the District of Columbia had only a 78% graduation rate. And the average graduation rate for the top five states in per-pupil spending was 81.8%, only .2% higher than the average graduation rate for the bottom five. The amount of money spent is clearly not the issue.<br /><br />It seems to me that if this nation wants to improve our education system, we've got to do something besides continue to raise taxes and hand money to public school systems. As the Heritage Foundation article entitled, "Examining 'A Nation At Risk'" points out,<br /><blockquote>This year, American taxpayers will spend more than $9,200 on the average public-school student. That's a real increase of 69 percent over the per pupil expenditure in 1980. The total bill for a student who remains through high school will be almost $100,000.</blockquote><br />And we see our schools continuing to decline. On page 6 of the Heritage Foundation's Backgrounder, April 28, 2008, the graph makes it clear - as funding has increased over the years since 1970, student performance on the National Assessment of Educational Progress has remained stable. The Heritage report continues,<br /><blockquote>We also know what doesn't work: Federal mandates such as No Child Left Behind. That law required states to test students, but it ends up giving states an incentive to "dumb down" their tests to maintain federal funding.<br /><br />A 2006 study by University of California researchers found the gap between state and federal proficiency scores had increased in 10 of 12 states examined since NCLB was enacted. It's better to simply let states provide the funding and hold themselves accountable.<br /></blockquote><br />And their solution? It's much better than the "Democracy At Risk" report's suggestions, which are full of "educationalese" - perhaps because it's written by private citizens rather than professionals in the education establishment. "Examining 'A Nation At Risk'" recommends:<br /><blockquote>We have big problems in our education system. But we'll solve them from the bottom up, not the top down.<br /><br />It's time to slash the regulation and start creating the educational system our students deserve.</blockquote><br />And the Backgrounder article has this recommendation:<br /><blockquote>At the federal level, Congress should reform federal education policies to protect academic transparency, eliminate inefficient bureaucracy, and encourage innovation at the state and local levels. Policymakers should embrace policies that give more families the freedom to choose their children’s school; allow school leaders to innovate and develop successful school models and improve teacher quality; and allow parents, lawmakers, and the general public to hold public schools and students accountable for results.</blockquote><br />This is near and dear to my heart as a professional educator and homeschooler. I hope the leaders in our federal government listen.Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-38309905376760294012008-07-23T08:38:00.006-06:002008-07-23T20:30:24.419-06:00More on the Stridency of Some Homeschool AdvocatesIf you've been following the comments in my previous post on the stridency of some homeschool advocates, you know there's been a fair amount of interest generated in this topic. And apparently the interest extends beyond just the readers of this blog - my Google alerts on the topic have picked up several similar posts in the last few days.<br /><br />Here is one that expresses my own concerns: "<a href="http://onelovelymess.blogspot.com/2008/07/homeschooling-without-being-separatist.html">Homeschooling without being a Separatist? etc.!</a> "<br /><br />Karry begins her post with this:<br /><br /><blockquote>I have been reading some things that previously homeschooled folks have said about their experiences, and why they hated homeschooling. The #1 reason I have found is exactly what I think a problem among Christian Homeschoolers is: an attitude of being separate and "better" than everyone else. As if, because we homeschool, our family is better than the family across the street who sends their kids to public school, or the family down the street who sends their kids to private school?</blockquote><p></p>This is precisely my concern, and Karry goes on to discuss why she believes this attitude is wrong. She also brings up a related concern, about the fact that some homeschooling parents keep their kids away from the public-schooled kids in their neighborhood. Now, I don't allow my kids to hang out indiscriminately with the kids in my neighborhood; but I do believe God has put us in this neighborhood for a reason, and He expects us as a family to minister to the other families around us. So I do allow my kids to play with our neighbor kids, closely supervised, of course. In fact, the only families in our neighborhood we've been able to build relationships with are the ones who have children near our own kids' age - those are the ones the Lord has given us to reach out to.<br /><br />Here's another post on the topic, this time from The Accidental Homeschooler: "<a href="http://accidentalhomeschooler.blogspot.com/2008/07/called-to-homeschool.html">Called to Homeschool</a>." Kelly has some great insight here, including a conversation she had with a friend as she was considering the question of whether "every Christian is called to homeschool."<br /><br />Kelly links also to this post from Spunky Homeschool on the same issue: "<a href="http://spunkyhomeschool.blogspot.com/2008/07/conventional-wisdom.html">Conventional Wisdom</a>." Spunky's post is fascinating. I especially thought this quote was interesting:<br /><br /><blockquote>Asking the homeschool movement to decide whether it will advance a specifically Biblcial vision or not is like asking a hammer if it will build a house or a table. It can't decide anything nor can it lose a vision for what it is supposed to build. Homeschooling, like a hammer, is completely dependent upon the one who uses it. No one philosophy or worldview controls homeschooling. As long as the freedom to homeschool is open to all parents, it is an exercise in futility to demand that the movement have only one specific vision --secular or biblical. </blockquote><br />And the post that started it all: "<a href="http://dangitbill.wordpress.com/2008/07/15/homeschooling-not-the-gospel/">Homeschooling is NOT the Gospel</a>." This one is full of piercing questions and comments, including this:<br /><br /><blockquote>Furthermore, the problem is not bad education, it is bad character (sin). The solution is not homeschooling, it is the gospel of Jesus Christ and participating in the growing kingdom of God. The utopian society is not homeschool grads in power, but the consummation of the kingdom of God which will only occur at the second coming of the Lord in glory. I fear that many in the Christian homeschooling movement have a false understanding of the problem, the solution, and the ultimate goal. And smooth-talking, eloquent, yet misguided speakers that give vision and encouragement to homeschooling parents are not helping build the kingdom of God.</blockquote><br />One more post on this topic and I'll leave it alone for a bit. This one is from IndianaJane's Journal, and is entitled, "<a href="http://indianajanesnotebook.blogspot.com/2008/07/ruminating-on-homeschooling.html">Ruminating on Homeschooling</a>." A sample of her post:<br /><br /><blockquote><p>And <a href="http://www.visionforum.com/hottopics/blogs/dwp/2008/04/3514.aspx">they</a> wouldn't mind keeping the non-Christians out of homeschooling, too. "In like manner, the homeschool movement must decide whether it will work to advance a specifcally Biblical vision, or take a “big tent” approach that is now comfortable and uncontroversial - and lose the covenantal vision. "<br /><br />What they don't seem to realize is that they were never the totality of the homeschool movement and with each year they are a smaller part. I have worked<br />hard for over ten years to help build the big homeschool tent, and in spite of<br />false witness from some in their camp, we are seeing the big tent get more and<br />more full.</p></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote>What I get, from all these posts, is that many homeschoolers believe deeply in what we are doing, but disagree with those who hold that it is the only acceptable position for Christians. It's my feeling that if we're going to successfully minister to the majority of people with whom we come in contact, we are not going to do it by preaching how much better we are than everybody else. When we flaunt our own self-righteousness, we alienate those to whom we could minister. We aren't able to encourage those who are struggling to hang in there, at least for one more year, to see what God might do for them. We aren't able to expose those who hold inaccurate positions on Scripture or young-earth creationism or any other topic to accurate, rational, factual information. And most significantly, we destroy our witness to the unbelievers among us - whether they are unbelieving homeschoolers, workers at the convention site, or curious bystanders who wonder what we're up to. The way to reach these people is with graciousness, gentleness, a loving spirit, and an openness to interact. If we don't demonstrate these qualities, all our self-righteousness is useless.<br /><br />It's also important to keep in mind that, while the Lord will certainly hold us accountable for how we raised and educated our children, He will also hold us accountable for how we ministered to other believers and how we witnessed to an unbelieving world. He's not going to be impressed if all we can say is, "Well, I homeschooled my 8 children and discipled them so everyone else could see how faithfully we followed You" - He wants us interacting with lost people, and showing our children how to do that.Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-19056547386928713082008-07-21T13:54:00.002-06:002008-07-21T14:14:59.177-06:00Time Magazine on Teen Girl PurityTime.com, Time Magazine's website, has a very interesting article this week entitled, "<a href="http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1823930-1,00.html">The Pursuit of Teen Girl Purity</a>." All too often, secular sources tend to look at conservative, Christian events with a skeptical eye; for a change, Nancy Gibbs, the journalist who wrote this article seems interested and curious as she attended a Father/Daughter Purity Ball at the Broadmoor hotel in Colorado Springs. What could motivate fathers and daughters, in 2008, to come together in the interest of preserving the young ladies' purity? As Ms. Gibbs comments, even the term purity has a "shadow of stains and stigma."<br /><br />Apparently much to Ms. Gibbs' surprise, she discovers that the ceremony is beautiful, and that "The goal seems less about making judgments than about making memories." Well, what do you know? :) These Christians who are so insistent that it's good for young people to practice abstinence really DO love their kids - rather than passing judgement on kids for being kids, we really believe it is in their best interest to have strong bonds with their parents (especially their fathers), and to save intimacy for marriage. And so we do what we can to give them a solid foundation, positive memories of what really matters in life, and to build the kind of relationships that will help them to stand in opposition to all the pressures they face (rather than wimping out and saying, "Well, since you're going to anyway, be sure to use birth control.").<br /><br />She sums up her article this way:<br /><br /><blockquote>Maybe mixed messages aren't just inevitable; they're valuable. On the one hand, for all the conservative outcry, there is no evidence that giving kids complete and accurate information about sex and contraception encourages promiscuity. On the other, a purity pledge basically says sex is serious. That it's not to be entered into recklessly. To deny kids information, whether about contraception or chastity, is irresponsible; to mock or dismiss as unrealistic the goal of personal responsibility in all its forms may suit the culture, but it gives kids too little power, too little control over their decisions, as though they're incapable of making good ones. The research suggests they may be more capable of high standards than parents are. "It's always tempting as a parent to say, Do as I say, not as I do," says a father who's here for the first time. "But it's more valuable to make the commitment yourself. Children can spot hypocrisy very quickly."</blockquote><br /><br />I was relatively pleased at the ending of her article. It shows a remarkable willingness to look honestly and fairly at what she was seeing, in a way that few in our culture are willing to do. And though I don't agree with her about whether telling kids everything encourages promiscuity (after all, what kid isn't insatiably curious on these topics? And what kid doesn't experiment with something if it seems mysterious and important - and inevitable, as so many s-x ed programs teach?), I'm thrilled to see her encouraging parents to help their kids have high standards.<br /><br />Just before that last paragraph, Ms. Gibbs wrote this one. It speaks clearly to the value of events such as the purity ball she visited, not only for the fathers and daughters involved, but also for the watching media and for the culture who sees these events through their eyes.<br /><br /><blockquote>If you listen long enough, you wonder whether there is really such a profound disagreement about what parents want for their children. Culture war by its nature pours salt in wounds, finds division where there could be common purpose. Purity is certainly a loaded word--but is there anyone who thinks it's a good idea for 12-year-olds to have sex? Or a bad idea for fathers to be engaged in the lives of their daughters and promise to practice what they preach? Parents won't necessarily say this out loud, but isn't it better to set the bar high and miss than not even try?</blockquote><br /><br />I hope more people gain this sort of insight from authors such as Nancy Gibbs. And I hope more parents are encouraged to set the bar high - missing is possible when you do that, but so is winning. :)Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-6549496139641250842008-07-17T09:00:00.002-06:002008-07-17T09:09:47.043-06:00Should Children Have Rights?Back in June I wrote a post entitled, "<a href="http://marcys-musings.blogspot.com/2008/06/another-court-takes-law-into-its-own.html">Another Court Takes Law Into Its Own Hands</a>." The post was a discussion of a Canadian judge who had overruled a father's logical consequence to his 12yo daughter, deeming it "excessive." A regular blog reader and commenter, after reading <a href="http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=1173">the original article</a> on which my post was based, responded, in part, with this paragraph:<br /><br /><blockquote>I notice . . . the reference to Senator Clinton and legislation that sees children as "child citizens" and permitting them some rights against their parents. I do not find this so awful as there are instances when parents are not acting in the best interest of their children... we see it all to often in the media. However, I would think that such legislation (passed or pending) needs to be very clear and not open to simply granting child rights simple for not getting a child's way.</blockquote><br /><br />I personally don't like the whole approach of spelling out certain rights of children, primarily because the results depend on our capricious court system. I recently discovered that the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, for example, states that one of the child's rights is to have their parents make decisions in their best interest. The problem with that is that parents sometimes have to make decisions that are NOT in the child's best interests, but ARE in the best interests of the family as a whole. <br /><br />Here's one example: My younger daughter is having difficulty learning to read. I have tried everything I can think of, and have been doing that for about 5 years, and she's still struggling (and is now approximately 2 years behind grade level in reading - fortunately since we homeschool I can read aloud to her and she can continue to progress in other subjects!). So yesterday, after having her evaluated by a friend who is a reading specialist, I came to the conclusion that she needed to attend our local homeschool enrichment program on Mondays, when my friend will be teaching a reading class, rather than on Fridays as we always have. My older daughter was devastated - "All my friends are going to be in the Friday school!" It is not in my older daughter's best interests to move to Mondays; however, my younger daughter's need to learn to read supercedes my older daughter's need to be with her friends. And our family's budget does not allow us to drive the half hour each way on two different days. <br /><br />But what would a court say if my older daughter chose to hire a lawyer and sue, and our country had agreed to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child? How could I then make the best decision for our family? I definitely DO consider my daughters' best interests; but sometimes decisions need to be made that on the surface seem contradictory to a given child's best interests in order to account for the whole picture of the family. <br /><br />And who is responsible for determining the best interests of my child anyway? I may believe it is also in my older daughter's best interests to make this change, too, because in the long run she will learn that certain needs are more significant than others, and that sometimes we must sacrifice what we want for the sake of someone else. But can I convince the court of that? I don't know. The judge may put more value on my daughter's socialization than on her character development - does that mean the judge has the right to decide?<br /><br />As a parent yourself, I'm sure you could also give examples when you've had to make this kind of decision. And this is only one example of how spelling out legal rights for kids can have unintended - and maybe disastrous - consequences for families (and even for the kids themselves).<br /><br />By very definition, children are immature, and thus are not able to make wise decisions, considering all the factors. While I realize some parents are negligent in their responsibilities toward their children, I don't think giving children legal rights is really going to solve that problem. I DO think it may cause serious problems to families who are doing their best to raise their children wisely and well. Ultimately, we have to give parents, not judges, the right to decide what is best for children - within certain limits, which obviously include NOT allowing child abuse. Granting children the right to sue their parents in court does not benefit children or their families.Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-11551174635078245872008-07-17T08:26:00.002-06:002008-07-17T08:35:59.903-06:00The Stridency of Many Homeschooling AdvocatesOnce again life has caught up with me and I've dropped the ball on my blog for several weeks. My apologies to anyone who reads me regularly.<br /><br />Dana has a great post over at <a href="http://principleddiscovery.com/">Principled Discovery</a> called, "<a href="http://principleddiscovery.com/2008/07/17/homeschooling-is-not-the-gospel/">Homeschooling Is Not the Gospel</a>," which picks up on one of my pet peeves about our state homeschooling organization. Those of you who know me well are aware that I live in Colorado; if you know much about Colorado homeschooling, you know that our state organization is headed by Kevin Swanson. Now don't get me wrong, I like Kevin as a person, and agree with him about many things - but I strongly disagree with the tone he (and our organization as a whole) seems to take toward anyone who doesn't agree with him. <br /><br />Dana's article is excellent and well worth reading in its entirety. She sums up her point with this statement:<br /><br />Actually, I fear that some of these overzealous arguments against public schools do more to close people off from the idea of homeschooling than anything.<br /><br />She's right. <br /><br />I too get very frustrated at the tendency of many homeschooling advocates to make this a huge battleground. Our state organization is becoming more and more strident in tone - and the funny thing is, that’s in spite of the fact that homeschooling is becoming easier and more popular all the time. The criticism becomes more heated every year, and the range of those criticized becomes greater. This year, the state organization allowed only those curriculum providers who would sign a young-earth creation statement. Now I’m a young-earth creationist myself, but I think that’s just wrong!<br /><br />Homeschooling does not benefit when homeschooling organizations become exclusionary: you must be a Christian, you can’t be enrolled in any kind of government schooling program, you must be a young-earth creationist - and it wouldn’t surprise me if soon you’ll have to believe birth control is wrong, too.<br /><br />Unlike a previous commenter, I still like the seminars on Christian worldview, building up the family, and maintaining a vision for homeschooling - many of them are pretty good and help keep me going when things get stressful. But I, too, am beginning to avoid the general sessions - and there are certain speakers I simply won’t go hear, because they are far too contentious.<br /><br />Why do we ask for war when it’s not necessary? And whatever happened to Romans 12:18, “If it is possible, so far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone”? Or Colossians 4:5,6: “Be wise in the way you act toward outsiders . . . Let your conversation be always with grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone”?<br /><br />It seems to me it’s time for a little grace, you know?Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com22tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-79684855389584481852008-06-20T21:18:00.002-06:002008-06-20T21:32:15.597-06:00Another Court Takes Law Into Its Own HandsIn Canada, a judge's ruling recently undermined a father who was trying to correct his 12-year-old daughter's disobedience. In a frightening violation of parental authority, the court ruled the father had punished his daughter "excessively" by refusing her permission to go on a school camping trip after she had disobeyed him. <a href="http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=1173">Details are here on Albert Mohler's blog</a>.<br /><br />This ruling is downright dangerous - not only for parents but also for children. If parents do not have the authority to choose logical consequences in order to prevent their children from engaging in dangerous, illegal, or inappropriate behavior - if children can sue and the court will simply step in and overrule the consequences just because the court happens to deem them "excessive" - then the government is going to raise a generation of unruly, undisciplined young people who have no concept of what adult life is really like. You see, if employees choose not to show up for work, or if they choose to have an intense argument with their boss, the consequences may be what the employees would deem excessive - they may be fired, and lose their income, a good reference, and perhaps even their home and possessions. Those are pretty excessive consequences for one little argument, or for "just being a bit late sometimes" - but they are reality. <br /><br />Missing a school camping trip seems to be a very appropriate consequence for a disobedient 12-year-old. It is sufficient to act as a deterrent to the behavior, without producing excessive long term pain. I know of no parent who would think that is an excessive punishment, especially in light of the fact that by the time a child reaches 12, she is coming to the end of the parent's ability to inflict meaningful consequences. It's critically important that before she leaves home, she comes to understand that the world does not operate according to her whims. Unfortunately, this young lady has just learned that it does - at least if she's willing to go to court to fight for those whims. I fear this is not the last we will hear about this young lady - and I fear the future will show she has not turned out better for this arbitrary court decision.Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-60417202365523607952008-06-08T18:55:00.002-06:002008-06-08T19:04:11.975-06:00Why Do People Dislike Homeschoolers?In today's Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal, Sonny Scott has a surprisingly frank, and fascinating, article entitled "<a href="http://www.djournal.com/pages/story.asp?ID=274594&pub=1&div=Opinion">Homeschoolers Threaten Our Cultural Comfort</a>." I don't know much about Mr. Scott, but I found his article enjoyable, if a bit unrealistic about how well-behaved homeschoolers are. Normally I prefer to encourage you to click over and read the article on the original site; however, this is a short article and it's hard to give you just a taste of it. So here it is in its entirety.<br /><br /><blockquote>You see them at the grocery, or in a discount store.<br /><br />It's a big family by today’s standards - "just like stair steps," as the old folks say. Freshly scrubbed boys with neatly trimmed hair and girls with braids, in clean but unfashionable clothes follow mom through the store as she fills her no-frills shopping list.<br /><br />There's no begging for gimcracks, no fretting, and no threats from mom. The older watch the younger, freeing mom to go peacefully about her task.<br /><br />You are looking at some of the estimated 2 million children being home schooled in the U.S., and the number is growing. Their reputation for academic achievement has caused colleges to begin aggressively recruiting them. Savings to the taxpayers in instructional costs are conservatively estimated at $4 billion, and some place the figure as high as $9 billion. When you consider that these families pay taxes to support public schools, but demand nothing from them, it seems quite a deal for the public.<br /><br />Home schooling parents are usually better educated than the norm, and are more likely to attend worship services. Their motives are many and varied. Some fear contagion from the anti-clericalism, coarse speech, suggestive behavior and hedonistic values that characterize secular schools. Others are concerned for their children’s safety. Some want their children to be challenged beyond the minimal competencies of the public schools. Concern for a theistic world view largely permeates the movement.<br /><br />Indications are that home schooling is working well for the kids, and the parents are pleased with their choice, but the practice is coming under increasing suspicion, and even official attack, as in California.<br /><br />Why do we hate (or at least distrust) these people so much?<br /><br />Methinks American middle-class people are uncomfortable around the home schooled for the same reason the alcoholic is uneasy around the teetotaler.<br /><br />Their very existence represents a rejection of our values, and an indictment of our lifestyles. Those families are willing to render unto Caesar the things that Caesar’s be, but they draw the line at their children. Those of us who have put our trust in the secular state (and effectively surrendered our children to it) recognize this act of defiance as a rejection of our values, and we reject them in return.<br /><br />Just as the jealous Chaldeans schemed to bring the wrath of the king upon the Hebrew eunuchs, we are happy to sic the state’s bureaucrats on these “trouble makers.” Their implicit rejection of America’s most venerated idol, Materialism, (a.k.a. “Individualism”) spurs us to heat the furnace and feed the lions.<br /><br />Young families must make the decision: Will junior go to day care and day school, or will mom stay home and raise him? The rationalizations begin. "A family just can't make it on one income." (Our parents did.) "It just costs so much to raise a child nowadays." (Yeah, if you buy brand-name clothing, pre-prepared food, join every club and activity, and spend half the cost of a house on the daughter’s wedding, it does.) And so, the decision is made. We give up the bulk of our waking hours with our children, as well as the formation of their minds, philosophies, and attitudes, to strangers. We compensate by getting a boat to take them to the river, a van to carry them to Little League, a 2,800-square-foot house, an ATV, a zero-turn Cub Cadet, and a fund to finance a brand-name college education. And most significantly, we claim “our right” to pursue a career for our own "self-fulfillment."<br /><br />Deep down, however, we know that our generation has eaten its seed corn. We lack the discipline and the vision to deny ourselves in the hope of something enduring and worthy for our posterity. We are tired from working extra jobs, and the looming depression threatens our 401k’s. Credit cards are nearly maxed, and it costs a $100 to fuel the Suburban. Now the kid is raising hell again, demanding the latest Play Station as his price for doing his school work … and there goes that modest young woman in the home-made dress with her four bright-eyed, well-behaved home-schooled children in tow. Wouldn’t you just love to wipe that serene look right off her smug face?<br /><br />Is it any wonder we hate her so?<br /><br />Sonny Scott a community columnist, lives on Sparta Road in Chickasaw County and his e-mail address is sonnyscott@yahoo.com.<br /></blockquote>Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-57060555902198458532008-06-04T20:05:00.003-06:002008-06-04T20:30:18.608-06:00Finally - A Non-Homeschooling Mom Gets It!I usually get frustrated reading articles about homeschooling written by people who don't homeschool. All too often those articles are full of stereotypes and false assumptions, and the authors really don't have a realistic view about homeschooling.<br /><br />But today I came across a refreshing change in this post entitled "Reconsidering Homeschooling," on the blog called Losses and Gains. The author is a mom who has never homeschooled, in spite of being a former elementary school teacher with a Masters in Teaching, because she never felt she and her older son would be able to get along. But she has a little girl, a 3-year-old, and she's thinking about homeschooling her. And rather than listening to all the garbage, she's thought realistically about why many of us do choose to homeschool. Here's what she thinks:<br /><br /><blockquote>I have realized that a lot of what drives families to homeschool is the desire to choose. To choose what you believe to be best for your child, to choose what works best for you, and to choose what works well for your family. I see the flexibility homeschooling families have in planning vacations and I envy that. I see the ease with which activities are planned because studies can be worked in and around each child's individual schedule. I see the way a child's unique interests and learning style can be explored and enhanced by a thoughtful, individualized curriculum. And I can't help but wonder too if homeschooling mother's like me who abhor messy, three dimensional projects just don't do them? Wouldn't that be great? No more book report mobiles hanging from a wire hanger. No more diaromas or <a href="http://lossesandgains.blogspot.com/2007/11/new-and-better-forms-of-torture.html">trioramas</a>. No more clay landscapes perforated with sticks and twigs. No more paper mache, glue guns and midnight runs to Office Max. Heaven.</blockquote><br /><br />Here is a lady who gets it. One of the strongest motivations for homeschooling, for many of us, is the freedom to choose what is best - for our children and for our families. That's why different homeschoolers function so very differently, and why homeschool conventions are filled with hundreds of different curriculum options - because we value choice! Some families like to work through basic textbooks and be done, leaving them lots of free time or even the possibility of accelerating education and getting through college young. Others really enjoy the messy craft projects (UGH! - And she's right; we don't do them - at least not very often!). :) My family happens to love reading aloud together; we do LOTS of that in our homeschool. We also value breadth and depth in education, so we don't accelerate - instead, we do lots of "extras," and study topics to whatever depth we choose together. If we want to spend weeks on ancient Egypt, fine; we don't have to rush through so we can get through a textbook with someone else's ideas about what's important for kids to do. We also value social interaction, so my kids go to a homeschool enrichment program all day one day a week, and to a co-op another afternoon every other week, not to mention swim team (3X/week) and weekly church, club, and youth group meetings.<br /><br />One reason so many homeschooling parents fight government intervention is that we have mostly chosen to homeschool because it gives us choices. Requiring us to have school district approval would mean our choices would be limited to what someone else thinks is best for our kids, someone else who barely even KNOWS our kids!<br /><br />Lori goes on to say that she is sending her kids to a new school next year.<br /><br /><blockquote>The New School is a K-12 school so if the boys are there, there is no reason we wouldn't enroll her there as well. No reason other than it is kind of far away from our house and it would mean putting a little 5 year old on a school bus for almost 2 hours each day. Which is why I have begun toying with the idea that maybe I would keep her home for a few years. Maybe just one or two.</blockquote><br /><br />I don't blame her a bit. Two hours on a school bus every day would be difficult for me as an adult - I can only imagine how tough it would be for a five-year-old! The trip home, after a long day at school, would be exhausting. I had a similar reaction when I realized our school bus took an hour each way, every day, to get the kids to school and home again - and our school is only 15 minutes from our house! Our first graders were leaving the house at 7:45 and getting home at 4:30! When I saw that, I was very glad I homeschooled. (This next year, my older daughter would have to leave at 6:45 and get home at 3:30, while my younger would leave at 7:45 and get home at 4:30. Then they'd have swim team or club meetings after that, plus homework - how would they even have time for dinner, let alone any time to be a kid? No thanks - I'll stick with homeschooling!)<br /><br />Anyway, I was very impressed with Lori's post. I hope she does decide to homeschool Pumpkin - she may be surprised to find it's more fun (and more work, too) than she ever thought it could be. :)Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31025548.post-68116209228848033422008-05-31T21:49:00.002-06:002008-05-31T21:56:03.687-06:00Homeschoolers' Adjustment to CollegeDana over at Principled Discovery has a fascinating post on the article by Dr. Laura about homeschoolers and socialization. In most respects, Dana agrees with Dr. Laura's article, but she takes issue with the claim that homeschoolers can have a hard time adjusting to college.<br /><br />Here's the original quote from the article:<br /><br />Obviously, home-schooled students have additional adjustments to make when leaving their homes and entering a university or college environment: social relationship, peer pressure, classroom structure, etc. They are being forced to adapt to a social environment decidedly different from their homes or home school support groups.<br /><br />And here's just a small taste of Dana's response:<br /><br />It may seem obvious, but is it true? Is there a qualitative difference between the homeschool and the traditional school which should favor the traditionally schooled student, thus making the homeschooler’s success that much more noteworthy? Are there social relationships, potential peer pressure and classroom structure factors which the homeschooler must overcome given their upbringing? Or are we focusing too narrowly on the external similarities between high school and college, and not enough on the qualitative differences?<br /><br />I think Dana's point here is excellent, and I believe my own experience backs it up. I was homeschooled for high school (and several earlier years as well), and then went on to college. I did have a rough first week - it was a bit intimidating to be completely on my own in a strange place (it was California, after all!), with my parents over 500 miles away, no car, and very little money. But once I made it through that first week, I LOVED college. In fact, I think it was one of the highlights of my life, and I still have wonderful memories and lifelong friends as a result. I went to class regularly, learned because I wanted to learn, turned in papers on time, gained independence, got excellent grades, worked part time, and graduated with high honors. <br /><br />I had many friends in college who had attended public school. Most of them had a much harder time adjusting to college life than I did. My dh, who had attended public school all his life, was thrilled when he got a C on his first exam ("I didn't fail!"). (Incidentally, his grades improved significantly after he married me halfway through, and I showed him what I knew about how to learn.) My best friend rebelled, dated young men her parents hated, and eventually dropped out. My first roommate struggled with friendships for several years, though she eventually got things figured out and I believe graduated reasonably happy. But their adjustments were far more difficult than my own.<br /><br />I must respectfully disagree with Dr. Laura on this point, and agree with Dana. The adjustments homeschoolers have to make are, in many cases (though certainly not all), far more superficial than the deeper adjustments required of students who have learned to "skate through" what public school requires. And in the areas that matter most, homeschoolers often have the advantage.Marcy Muserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17787308098682419608noreply@blogger.com0