What does children not being equal have to do with this conversation? The varying strengths and weaknesses of various children are not in question.
Again, age is not an issue in all this.
A child's potential to **** up his or her own life isn't relevant to this discussion either.
In fact, you have only really made one point, and that is that parents having their own ideas about the world and life and demanding that their children think and act exactly as they do is not only expected, but is also a rational parenting tool.
__________________ "If I were you"
"If you were me, you'd know the safest place to hide...is in sanity!
Last edited by Devil King on Mar 10th, 2008 at 12:40 AM
Well, I suppose requiring a parent to fill out a form of some sort indicating that they are at least competent enough to teach and have the child's best interests in mind would be more than enough. I'm still not even sure about that because I think it's kind of bullshit that I have to go through any kind of form to teach my own kid in my own home.
The SC has pretty much upheld that educational choice is okay as long as the state can implement state requirements. That seems fair enough to me.
A student can just as easily be "messed up" from an inexperienced or poor teacher in a public school setting as they can be by an amateur parent teaching in a home school setting.
Thank you.
Kids, face it, you all can't be winners. The real world is not like that. Don't let idiot teachers and pricinpals and the like confuse you. You lose some and you win some. Life isn't fair. Life isn't equal.
That being said, from my own personal experience, there comes a time when a person does know indeed what is best for them. No later than the age of fifteen in my opinion. At fifteen at least, you have some sort of semblance for what is best for you and can start leaning off that dependency on the adult or other adults to make decisions for you. A time as to come when the parent can cast you out to sea and let you hook on the fish that you want to and not fear for they can always reel you back in and unhook you from that fish.
No they really can't. In public school you will have multiple teachers and at least SOME of them will be decent. If your parent sucks though, that's the only perspective you get.
WTF are you talking about? I was referring to the negative connotation that is given to "home-schoolers".
But if you want to take it that direction..What do these things mean to you?
I was and still am at a disadvantage to someone like you. My point wasn't to say "OMG look at me...". It was to show the merits of homeschooling even on a significantly learning disabled child.
Just think of the progress an AVERAGE person could have made in the same environment. With proper refinements, someone like you could have been done with high school by 11. THAT was more or less my underlying point. Homeschooling can be very successful and sometimes, it is one of the best options. (Depending on the parents.)
I don't know who said it ...but I agree with the person who mentioned regulating or standardizing even homeschoolers. (I think it was Ush.)
I believe that once a year-public, private, and home schoolers-should be subjected to a national standardized test. This happens already, for the most part, but I don't think homeschoolers are included.
Like I said, I think a child should have to take a test proving they cannot be provided for by the public school system. If they get the correct scores THEN they can be homeschooled.
IMO it is inexcusable that Christian parents should be able to pull their kids out of school just to try and get them away from opposing viewpoints.
That is one thing that bothers me. If you've seen Jesus Camp , you'll know why. They basically brainwash their children on everything they believe. I think that is repulsive personally. That definitely is problematic.
There definitely are some kinks that need to be worked out on a state to state basis.
Exactly, and that's why there needs to be a test to prove they have legit reasons for pulling their child out, as well as benchmark tests and other ones to prove the parents are accomplishing their goals.
Where I come from, there were about two hardcore, right-wing, Jesus-freak type kids in my class. I made a school message board with a religion forum, and immediately started arguing with them. I whooped their ass, they were so uninformed and I think she got humiliated in front of everyone for her inability to form a coherent argument. I think her parents ended up pulling her out for homeschooling because they knew I was poking holes in her ideology every day.
''For applicants who may have left formal education some time ago, extensive relevant knowledge and experience and, normally at least one good pass at A-level or two good AS-levels, an Access or other equivalent qualification will be required.'' - Nottingham Trent.
''Minimum points required from qualifications with the volume and depth of A level or equivalent: 160 '' Plymouth. (A D is 60 points).
''Minimum points required from qualifications with the volume and depth of A level or equivalent: 160'' - Leeds Metropoliton.
''Minimum points required from qualifications with the volume and depth of A level or equivalent: 180'' Newman University College.
All for teaching degrees.
__________________
"All morons hate it when you call them a moron." - Holden Caulfield
A levels are what we do after secondary school, which we finish after our GCSEs at the age of 16. They're completely voluntary and are necessary to get into university (A levels). You usually take three or four subjects, it stands for Advanced Level.
They're not particularly hard, just bloody boring while you're doing them.
__________________
"All morons hate it when you call them a moron." - Holden Caulfield
Gender: Male Location: Impacting nations and generations
Even as a committed Christian in full-time ministry that works for my church, I agree with you on the Jesus Camp deal. That type of indoctrination isn't right. (From my perspective, it isn't even necessary, as God will reveal Himself to the kids on a much more easy, sunday-school type level)
(open question to all):
Counterpoint: Telling parents that they can't "pull their kids out of school just to try and get them away from opposing viewpoints" as King Kandy said, is basically forcing indoctrination upon the kids by putting them in an abortion approving, evolution theory pushing, "we as humans were just accidents" mentality that many parents don't agree with or approve of.
Is that not just as bad?
Or because it's not religion, then you think forcing a viewpoint on them different than that of what the family wants is okay? Was attempting to answer you. There is no point where a kid can break free of what his parents want him to be, until age 18. (or legal emancipation)
Kids as a whole don't know what the heck they are doing, and only have a semblance of what TRUE wisdom is. So the whole mindset of "breaking free of the indoctrination of the parents" is nonsense to me, because as I said, unless it's illegal or harmful, then the kid doesn't have anything better anyway. Just some ideas, some blind stabs in the dark, but he doesn't know better than his parents.
Thousands of years of generations have thought so, and by and large, they get around 24, 25 and realize that 'ol mom and pop did know a thing or two.
The idea of "breaking free" of what they try to impart as values is just flight of fancy emotionalism, and except for certain dangerous, illegal situations, not grounded or based in any concrete reason to NOT do what they say, or take on what they believe, and based more on silly teenage rebelliousness.
As the individual matures and grows, they may have other experiences, beliefs may differ, etc...but until the thought police come, it's still up to the parents to train up the kids in the way that they feel they should go, and no teenage impulsive, selfish "I want it now!" thinking should even be considered or discussed in the fashion of "...when is it viable, and can override what the parents want them to do."
That answer it a little more clearly?
Thread topic: It's ridiculous. Parents can homeschool children if they wish. As long as the kids are able to pass age-required material in all subjects, I don't see what the issue is. Parents don't help hardly ANY kids past 8th grade, and what they learn, in school or at home, is up to their personal discipline, study habits, and so on. (special needs kids, however, unless cared for by a trained specialist or parent who is such, should be in a school to help them through their developmental delays or other issues.)
Which begs the logical next question to my statements. At what point does it become the job of the government to step in and mandate how you raise your kids? At what point does society step in and say that a child should be exposed to a variety of ideas as opposed to the dogmatic (and varied) up-bringing of their parents? When does the village raise the child? I think the over all question involved in this judgement is that of a child's right v. a parent's. It isn't about kids being too stupid or a prents engrained ideology that they want to pass on to another generation. (Which is what you're saying is totally legitimate...but it ignores progress)
I think a lot of it has to do with these parents wanting to validate their own outlook by assuring that their children subscribe to the same ideas, religion or social understanding.
__________________ "If I were you"
"If you were me, you'd know the safest place to hide...is in sanity!
In case you haven't noticed, there are plenty of people with teaching degrees who are lousy teachers as well. But how often do you come across a lousy teacher who is a PHD who wants to educate his kids himself?
KMC Community Forums
Mar 10th, 2008 12:36 AM
