Recent Posts
The real question is: Is our children learning? Apparently, childrens do.
how many United States are there? 58? 59?
they fly around a lot, they don't get a lot of sleep, and they talk and talk and talk some more, until they say something dumb.
they fly around a lot, they don't get a lot of sleep, and they talk and talk and talk some more, until they say something dumb.
Heh heh heh... I remember that one.
BTW, how are you finding the resources in your neck of the woods? Are you getting ABA or any of the other therapies? How is your son doing?
Delaware is very low-key about their autism services but I haven't found any state that offers better services. They have a fantastic Autism School that provides 2 special teacher per class of 6 students and each day they provide individual speech and physical therapists that spend individual time with each child several times a week. They are currently doing limited integration time in a classroom of typical preschoolers for my son with one of the special teachers as a helper for him. He is making great strides. His speech is doing really well, he is gaining a ton of self-help skills like dressing himself, prepping his lunch sandwich, pouring his own drinks and a bunch of other stuff. I am very pleased with his progress.
The entire program offered by the Delaware Autism Program is free. All therapies. I have no out of pocket expenses.There is also a great community of active parents of autism that share a wealth of info and meet regularly to offer support and discuss treatment options from the far-out stuff down to the more generally accepted methods. I feel blessed that I happened to be living here with this issue.
I expect my son will either be placed in a typical school environment next school year as a preschooler with an assigned therapist overseer or the year after as a 1st grader.
He is a fun dude. Happy, sociable, good humor, and highly intelligent once you get past a few behavioral issues.
Thanks for asking. How is things in your neck of the woods?
Also I wish I lived near you too. SoCal, someone in the same boat, thinking of homeschooling, D&Der....it would make the whole process easier and less imposing to share the burden....
I can only relate the home school experiance of my closest friends.
They took their 12 yr old daughter out of the public school when they moved to the mountains of VA, the waynesboro/charlottsville area because they didnt want her to participate in the "religious" studies.
The kids were all bussed to the local church where they were given a christian perspective on all of todays social and moral issues. Being told this group was going to burn because of this, that and the other didnt sit well with my pagan friends so they started homeschooling thier daughter. Neither of them have teaching certs but they used the resources they had and now their little girl at 16 is first chair cello and has been accepted to a art college. The young lady dosen't like math so she got all of her math and sciences out of the way first then all of her state english and other requirements were fun to her.
I look at her and am amazed at what she has set as her goals, and she has every reason to believe she will acheive them. From a non-parent outsiders perspective homeschooling is the best thing for todays youth.
I hope you're only considering this if you're qualified. Most home-schooled kids I've worked with (5 of 7) are considerably behind academically. So many parents feel that they're the best to teach their own kids. How well can the average parent (or better than average) teach Chemistry or Shakespeare or Calculous or Psychology? How many are trained in early childhood development and psychology?I mean, I'm a considerably well educated guy; I could teach my kids literature and anything in the humanities and I am trained in education but I wouldn't pretend to teach economics or biology or analytical geometry, etc., etc.
The one friend I have that is "home-schooling" her two children actually has a group of about 40 parents who meet regularly with each other and their kids to talk about lesson plans, social activities and grading. It sounds better organized than most regular schools I know of (I have 2 friends who are teachers in the public system). And her 2 children are brilliant, polite and socially well-adjusted. It really depends on the situation they are in and it is a disservice to paint all home schoolers with the same brush.
About teaching and learning in general:
One thing that can really make a difference in how well your child excells in any given study area (in fact, this applies to adults too), is to find out what kind of learning style suits him or her best.
Some kids are visual kids (basically the normal chalkboard way of teaching), some are listeners, some are hands on and some are excercise kids (there might be more smaller categories).
A recent test carried out, by a public school here in Denmark, showed that in just 100 days they were able to move the school from its starting place at 1,197 among 1600 schools into the top 100 of schools, when it came to grades - by incorporating Learning Styles into the teachings.
The level of student satisfaction also rose close to 15% during this time.
Now, a year after the experiment, where the learning styles are still used in part of the school week, the kids have maintained their higher grades and a lot have even improved even more.
A starting place to learn more about Learning Styles is here:
Learningstyles.net
Now, this was done in a public school (several other schools have since started to incorporate this way of teaching since), imagine what it can do with a smaller amount of kids, e.g. homeschooling or homeschooling co-ops.
Thanks for asking. How is things in your neck of the woods?
That's great. I'm really glad you've found resources and a community to plug into.
We're doing well, much of the same. My son is the sweetest, nicest kid and a ton of fun. He's doing pretty well in kindergarten (notwithstanding the lack of many friends). He loves the routines - today they had a substitute and he told them the schedule and how things are done. He's always had trouble with fine motor skills (writing), and that was the hardest thing at first. He's getting much better at it as time goes on.
We had him in a similar early intervention program pre-preschool. Those are great. He had an aide in preschool, and some pull-out services (speech, physical therapy). He's also been doing ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) for a few years.
At the end of the day, all I can really do is hope it helps him make his way in the world (which, I guess, is what all parents do). I feel sad that he spends so much of his time in these therapies - the kid practically has had a full time job since he was 3 - but they're definitely helping him develop his social skills, communication skills, and self-awareness.
My son gets bullied too; he's just a short kid. The other kids in his class are about 3/4 of a head taller than him. I think also in Texas they put their kids in kindergarten at the oldest age they can for football or something...
He's in a charter school, it's a pretty good school, (they actually use PHONICS) and he's kinda charming so at least all the teachers love him, so they try to look out for him.
Yeah, there are a lot of parents in my neighborhood that did that too - holding back kids so they can be bigger for sports (and their brains more developed for standardized tests). Everyone's always looking for an edge.
Sorry to hear you son gets bullied. I'd offer some advice, but I don't have any, so instead I'll just say that I feel the pain. I hope it gets better for him and, failing that, I hope the other kids break their ankles and s!#% their pants in school.
Yeah, there are a lot of parents in my neighborhood that did that too - holding back kids so they can be bigger for sports (and their brains more developed for standardized tests). Everyone's always looking for an edge.
My son is nearly the youngest (often by a full year) and taller than most (all?) in his class. If we held him back, he would be bored.
Unfortunately, most people I have met that were homeschooled were lacking in social skills. My brother's ex-wife was homeschooled and her mom took her tests for her. I'm not debating the statistics, I just haven't seen it.
There are other things to consider besides what you know or what you can teach. My wife is about as much of an introvert as you can be. My son is extroverted to the extreme. If she had to homeschool our son, it would be ... bad.
Speaking of engaged children, we're trying something different (for us) in our house. We're designating one day a month as a "No TV Day". That was today. We've had a great day with lots of reading, board games, piano practice, talking, hugging, cooking, ... Best Day Ever.
Cooking! YES! Sounds like a great day. :D
I can only relate the home school experience of my closest friends.
They took their 12 yr old daughter out of the public school when they moved to the mountains of VA, the Waynesboro/Charlottesville area because they didnt want her to participate in the "religious" studies.
The kids were all bussed to the local church where they were given a Christian perspective on all of todays social and moral issues. Being told this group was going to burn because of this, that and the other
Steve:
Am I reading this correctly? A public school is taking the kids to a church to hear religious sermons? Is this done during school hours, much less on the public dime?
Yes bill, it is I was as shocked and amazed as you probably are BUT you don't mess with tradition. The parents all sign forms or some such so that protects the school and if a chld doesn't go they spend that hour in the library and then are subject to ridicule and bullying for not being Christian. Thats just the way kids are, if your different you get picked on. Anyway she loves home schooling and her musical talent is being nurtured in a much more healthy environment so it's a win/win for all.
Should there be a 1-to-1 ratio for children to teachers?
That's just not possible. Sorry.
Even if you could find that many people who wanted to teach in every district (and good luck with that!) and they were all decently qualified (which we can't manage now) you'd never find the money to pay for them all with the way education is presently funded.
Yes bill, it is I was as shocked and amazed as you probably are BUT you don't mess with tradition. The parents all sign forms or some such so that protects the school and if a chld doesn't go they spend that hour in the library and then are subject to ridicule and bullying for not being Christian. Thats just the way kids are, if your different you get picked on.
I hope you were joking. I'd hate for you to get the wrong idea about a state I really like being in. Mind you N.C will ALWAYS be my home but VA is nice too. Ya gotta go where the work is.
If you want a more open minded type of area try the northern va alexandria area. if you want a more republican/military mindset then live in the norfolk area( just be ready for heavy traffic) The richmond area is anything goes and the waynesboro/charlottsville area is heavy counrty/ultra christian. So you see theirs something here for everybody.
Yes bill, it is I was as shocked and amazed as you probably are BUT you don't mess with tradition. The parents all sign forms or some such so that protects the school and if a chld doesn't go they spend that hour in the library and then are subject to ridicule and bullying for not being Christian. Thats just the way kids are, if your different you get picked on.I hope you were joking. I'd hate for you to get the wrong idea about a state I really like being in. Mind you N.C will ALWAYS be my home but VA is nice too. Ya gotta go where the work is.
If you want a more open minded type of area try the northern va alexandria area. if you want a more republican/military mindset then live in the norfolk area( just be ready for heavy traffic) The richmond area is anything goes and the waynesboro/charlottsville area is heavy counrty/ultra christian. So you see theirs something here for everybody.
Someone I love very much lives in Richmond. I love that place, it's beautiful.
Yes bill, it is I was as shocked and amazed as you probably are BUT you don't mess with tradition. The parents all sign forms or some such so that protects the school and if a chld doesn't go they spend that hour in the library and then are subject to ridicule and bullying for not being Christian. Thats just the way kids are, if your different you get picked on. Anyway she loves home schooling and her musical talent is being nurtured in a much more healthy environment so it's a win/win for all.I can only relate the home school experience of my closest friends.
They took their 12 yr old daughter out of the public school when they moved to the mountains of VA, the Waynesboro/Charlottesville area because they didnt want her to participate in the "religious" studies.
The kids were all bussed to the local church where they were given a Christian perspective on all of todays social and moral issues. Being told this group was going to burn because of this, that and the other
Steve:
Am I reading this correctly? A public school is taking the kids to a church to hear religious sermons? Is this done during school hours, much less on the public dime?
In Utah they also have religious classes but the school doesn't provide them or bus everyone there. They have what is called release time, where you can leave school for religious instruction if you wish too. I think it's a pretty good system, lots better tha what it sounds like they have in VA.
Have you seen this TEDTalk from Ken Robinson?
Very interesting ideas presented. What should we teach these kids? Should there be a 1-to-1 ratio for children to teachers?
I've watched it about five or six times. I think he's about as right as you can get on almost all of the things he talked about.
I've watched it about five or six times. I think he's about as right as you can get on almost all of the things he talked about.Have you seen this TEDTalk from Ken Robinson?
Very interesting ideas presented. What should we teach these kids? Should there be a 1-to-1 ratio for children to teachers?
Thanks for this. I think I'll order his books.
My situation is similar to David's. If the school just says, "We have nothing to teach him because he's too far above his grade level. Have you considered private tutoring?" then there's something seriously wrong with the school.
Well, what do you expect? The school has limited resources because people don't want to pay the taxes to provide more and it has to put up with everybody's kids. So it does what it can but it's a question of triage. Who gets the focus and concern when resources are limited? The people who need it more to get to the point where the district isn't getting penalized as "failing" because too many of its kids are under par.
It's the middle class dilema. You don't get attention because someone else needs it more or can afford more of it on their own. It sucks but it's not necessarily because there's something seriously wrong with the school. It's a far greater systematic problem that can't be separated from broader political priorities.
My situation is similar to David's. If the school just says, "We have nothing to teach him because he's too far above his grade level. Have you considered private tutoring?" then there's something seriously wrong with the school.
Well, what do you expect? The school has limited resources because people don't want to pay the taxes to provide more and it has to put up with everybody's kids. So it does what it can but it's a question of triage. Who gets the focus and concern when resources are limited? The people who need it more to get to the point where the district isn't getting penalized as "failing" because too many of its kids are under par.
It's the middle class dilema. You don't get attention because someone else needs it more or can afford more of it on their own. It sucks but it's not necessarily because there's something seriously wrong with the school. It's a far greater systematic problem that can't be separated from broader political priorities.
It may be though that there is something seriously wrong with schooling. The assumption that the best place for children to learn is in a crowded room with 20 to 30 other children of similar ages is still suspicious.
But, yes, schools do have limited resources. They should be better funded. Teachers and resources should be made available so that all students are able to be intellectually and emotionally engaged and benefit from schooling.
P.S. My four year old just started reading your response. I didn't know she could read. Am I going to have another kindergarten teacher looking at me like I'm just trying to make her life difficult?
The assumption that the best place for children to learn is in a crowded room with 20 to 30 other children of similar ages is still suspicious.
20-30? When I was teaching Earth Science in Virginia, I seldom had less than 36 in a class -- and that was a lab class. History classes sometimes had as many as 45. This is, of course, in rooms designed for 24 students.
It may be though that there is something seriously wrong with schooling. The assumption that the best place for children to learn is in a crowded room with 20 to 30 other children of similar ages is still suspicious.
But that's not really the case. The assumption these days, certainly here in south central Wisconsin, is that a class with a smaller size is a much bettter place for young children to learn. Any school district saying the opposite is probably ignorant of studies into the effects of class size or is putting a good spin on a less-than-ideal situation.
I think public schools can be good places to educate kids on a whole range of topics not necessarily limited to the 3-Rs. But it really does take a major commitment to do it. Some local districts and states are more likely to make that commitment than others, hence our larger tax burdens but also comparatively better academic performance in the public schools.
My situation is similar to David's. If the school just says, "We have nothing to teach him because he's too far above his grade level. Have you considered private tutoring?" then there's something seriously wrong with the school.
Well, what do you expect? The school has limited resources because people don't want to pay the taxes to provide more and it has to put up with everybody's kids. So it does what it can but it's a question of triage. Who gets the focus and concern when resources are limited? The people who need it more to get to the point where the district isn't getting penalized as "failing" because too many of its kids are under par.
It's the middle class dilema. You don't get attention because someone else needs it more or can afford more of it on their own. It sucks but it's not necessarily because there's something seriously wrong with the school. It's a far greater systematic problem that can't be separated from broader political priorities.
It may be though that there is something seriously wrong with schooling. The assumption that the best place for children to learn is in a crowded room with 20 to 30 other children of similar ages is still suspicious.
But, yes, schools do have limited resources. They should be better funded. Teachers and resources should be made available so that all students are able to be intellectually and emotionally engaged and benefit from schooling.
P.S. My four year old just started reading your response. I didn't know she could read. Am I going to have another kindergarten teacher looking at me like I'm just trying to make her life difficult?
It could be Tarren! Congrats, my mom had a similar reaction when I started reading street signs while riding with her on the bus when I was around the same age. There's nothing like the surprise a parent feels when their little one starts comprehending things around them.
But getting back to your post, this raises an interesting point- is there something wrong with the school just because your child is smart? I don't mean you as in YOU, but in the general sense. I encountered this a lot when I tutored elementary school kids as a college student. The parents I met who focused more on challenging their children as opposed to making sure they passed standardized testing were always outraged that their child was smarter than other kids and blamed the school for it. This attitude usually ground out any interest they had in said area of budding expertise within a year or two, as they swiftly learned that being smart meant more work for both parent(kids are observant) and themselves. I'm sure parents want to have their child maintain a certain edge in whatever area they excel in, but this shouldn't be done in a way so that it seems a punishment for the school they attend(which loses a good student that will almost automatically be replaced with a poor one), or the child themself.
It may be though that there is something seriously wrong with schooling. The assumption that the best place for children to learn is in a crowded room with 20 to 30 other children of similar ages is still suspicious.
But that's not really the case. The assumption these days, certainly here in south central Wisconsin, is that a class with a smaller size is a much bettter place for young children to learn. Any school district saying the opposite is probably ignorant of studies into the effects of class size or is putting a good spin on a less-than-ideal situation.
I think public schools can be good places to educate kids on a whole range of topics not necessarily limited to the 3-Rs. But it really does take a major commitment to do it. Some local districts and states are more likely to make that commitment than others, hence our larger tax burdens but also comparatively better academic performance in the public schools.
Okay, let me rephrase: the assumption that schools are the best place to learn is suspicious. People can talk about how schools could be improved, that class sizes could be made smaller, that more resources could be made available, that the curriculum could be updated, etc. but shouldn't the first question be 'Why schooling?'. Convince me they are worth saving.
What are children learning in school these days?"Barrak Hussein Obama....Mmmm, Mmmm, Mmmm!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBA65i26lv8
I'll see your bet and raise you.
Schools have always been institutions of political indoctrination.
... but shouldn't the first question be 'Why schooling?'. Convince me they are worth saving.
While there are all kinds of statistics going around about how great homeschooling is, I really think that a lot of these results take some things for granted. I'd be curious to find out what the average IQ of the parents are that are doing the homeschooling. I have a rather strong suspicion that it is considerably higher than average. Which tells me that as many people that are out there that can homeschool, there are many more that either can't or shouldn't.
In your opinion, what do you think would happen to the majority of kids out there if there wasn't a public school system? Sure there are problems -- especially with each individual district/school -- but that doesn't necessarily mean you should throw out the baby with the bathwater.
... but shouldn't the first question be 'Why schooling?'. Convince me they are worth saving.
There are lots of stuff with this. Some of this has to do with expectations. Sending our child to school was a very conscious decision. While there are some things that I expect out of school, there are some things that I don't. He is about two grade levels above his grade in reading. I seriously doubt that it is because of the superior skills of the teacher -- it's because of what he learns from us at home and because of what we (his parents) feel is important. One of the main reasons to send him to school is so he knows how to deal with and work with different leadership types. In the real world, you don't necessarily get to choose your boss or others that you will need to work with. There are MANY times that "it's not fair" but you still need to deal with it and work through it.
I know what my son is capable of. I know what I expect out of the school system. I also know what I need to do to get him where I feel he should be. Far too many people (in my very honest opinion) want the schools to be both parent and teacher. That's where I feel the system really falls apart.
I'm not sure of the veracity of this, but I heard that a set of statistics was run for graduating high school seniors in Texas. When asked "What is the nearest foreign country?" 73% said "Canada"
To which my response was "Damn! That's almost a third!"
The other 37% said Oklahoma.
There are lots of stuff with this. Some of this has to do with expectations. Sending our child to school was a very conscious decision. While there are some things that I expect out of school, there are some things that I don't. He is about two grade levels above his grade in reading. I seriously doubt that it is because of the superior skills of the teacher -- it's because of what he learns from us at home and because of what we (his parents) feel is important.
That's the truth. I was anywhere from four to six levels ahead in reading through the back half of elementary school, which is pretty good considering I spent the previous three years in pull-out extra help programs for the same. My teachers ranged from average to awful with the occasional good thrown in. None of them were the kind of wizards who you see in the movies teaching functional illiterates to do calculus in a single year. (Those teachers don't actually exist. The movies always compress a several year program into a single year, or a single semester.)
But reading was extremely important at home. My parents read, and read to me. Often with me on the lap and holding the book. The one baby toy I remember is a strip of foam-stuffed rubber that folded up into a kind of super-thick four-page picture book.
The hard truth is you do more to set your kids up for success, or to undermine the same, at home than all the teachers your kid ever sees could do put together. They're taking cues from home about the value of education, intelligence, learning, schools, teachers, and all of that long before kindergarten and they keep taking them every day when they go home and every morning before they come. Good or bad teachers and situations (I could tell you stories about my elementary school and its forty year old reference books, asbestos, and the like.) make a difference, but it's nothing compared to what parenting does.
Or as my Methods teacher put it, "There's not a lot you can do for a kid who goes home every night and hears rants about damned teachers and their dirty unions and stupid schools and how it's all ruining the world."
... but shouldn't the first question be 'Why schooling?'. Convince me they are worth saving.In your opinion, what do you think would happen to the majority of kids out there if there wasn't a public school system? Sure there are problems -- especially with each individual district/school -- but that doesn't necessarily mean you should throw out the baby with the bathwater.
So, our defence of schooling is that we wouldn't know what to do with our kids if they didn't go to school? That's weak.
Children do better in school if parents read with them, talk with them, eat with them, and play with them on a daily basis. That's the best thing we could do with our kids.
As far as educating children, I bet that if we replaced schools with adult supervision in spaces full of interesting play opportunities that provided age and level appropriate challenges, places to read, study rooms, and regular assessment, you'd get better results for less money.
As far as educating children, I bet that if we replaced schools with adult supervision in spaces full of interesting play opportunities that provided age and level appropriate challenges, places to read, study rooms, and regular assessment, you'd get better results for less money.
Just "adult supervision"? What kind of ratio should we have? What kind of training should the adults have?
I taught for two years. What you described above would work for those parents who also felt that it would work or that that was important. But for the vast majority of kids out there it would not work.
Regardless of how you feel, teaching happens in the home. If it doesn't happen in the home, teachers spend more time actually combating that lack than actually teaching.
The way I see it, the main difference between homeschool and more "traditional" school is that with homeschool the child is FAR less influenced by others and will also not influence others as much. But in either case, if you are not teaching your children at home first, the child will take that as a cue as to how much effort they should put into it.
I still kind of feel like you think that you are the "majority". My experience seems to show that gamers (especially pen & paper gamers) are much more intelligent than the "norm". I taught 8th grade math for two years. It was kind of considered the "bad" side of town. 30% of the 8th graders read at a 3rd grade level or less. Their "goal" in life was to get a job at McDonalds. These kids learned from their parents that learning was not important. They "learned" that they system was "wrong". That teachers are "dumb". And they spent the last 8 years learning how not to learn. You could have done your scenario. Your kids could. My kids could. But there is a whole world out there where it wouldn't work at all.
Teachers get a bad rap. I taught 180 different kids a day. 6 classes of around 30 kids each. Not only could many of them not read, many of them couldn't fill in a blank times table -- even if they were given the entire class. Some couldn't do it with a calculator. How do you motivate someone who has spent the last 8 years figuring out how not to do work? Do you really think that the above scenario would have helped? One class was so bad and I was at my wits end. Nothing I did had any effect. Then I tried to time them on a worksheet -- "You have 5 minutes to complete this worksheet. Go." It was great -- 5 minutes of silence as they worked to do it -- why? I have no idea. But that was all I did for two months. Hardly graded a thing in the class -- it didn't really matter. They were working on math. After around two months one of the kids asked when we would do something else. I asked if they were ready to learn. We actually got a lot done that year. It's really hard to undo bad programming done at home.
I saw the assistant principal where I taught recently. He asked if I had seen any of the kids I taught -- who didn't show up on America's Most Wanted. At least two of the kids from there ended up on that show. When I was teaching, one of the kids was absent. I asked about it. Apparently she was busted for breaking and entering -- with her mother and younger daughter. It was like it was a family outing. How do you teach against that kind of an influence?
Sorry, I'm rambling. I just have strong feelings about this. The teacher's job (as impossible as it is) is made easier or harder based on what happens in the kids' homes.
Children do better in school if parents read with them, talk with them, eat with them, and play with them on a daily basis. That's the best thing we could do with our kids.
QFT
Sometimes I think that we are talking the same language and somehow still disagree. Part of me really feels like people should have a liscense to have children. What you said here just doesn't happen enough. If it did, things would be far different.
Moff, out of interest, assuming that you are correct, that the majority of children don't want to learn because of the examples at home, and thus resist learning - is the cost benefit of pumping them through the college-prep system worthwhile or should the system be re-examined to determine whether or not there might be better ways of training a workforce?
Also, assuming the majority of homeschooling families are inherently more interested in academics than the norm, why should we be criticized for wanting to pull our children out of a system geared towards mediocrity and those who hate to learn?
My experience seems to show that gamers (especially pen & paper gamers) are much more intelligent than the "norm".
I think it's more of the case that gamers get more opportunities to exercise thier cognitive qualities. It's not that much more different than working out physically.
Yes. But my point was that we should not look at ourselves as the "norm". And that finding a "solution" for us leaves out a majority of others.
I'm not bashing teachers, Moff. I think schools are underfunded and students get put into classes that are much too large. I think teachers are overworked and are forced to teach towards the middle. I think students are taught to not be intellectually curious by curriculum that is often not targetting their needs and interests but those of the state. I'm not bashing teachers; I'm questioning schooling.
I taught for two years.
I've taught for thirteen (but only two was in a middle or high school exclusively).
Regardless of how you feel, teaching happens in the home. If it doesn't happen in the home, teachers spend more time actually combating that lack than actually teaching.
Agreed, kind of, in principle. Learning happens in the home. A lot of that learning doesn't involve anything that looks like teaching. If, as you've said, that learning is so very important, maybe schools/teaching should look a little more like that informal learning environment.
The way I see it, the main difference between homeschool and more "traditional" school is that with homeschool the child is FAR less influenced by others and will also not influence others as much. But in either case, if you are not teaching your children at home first, the child will take that as a cue as to how much effort they should put into it.
I'm not really arguing for home schools. I'm asking if mainstream schools as they exist today in almost all industrialized countries are really a model worth defending. Maybe we need to rethink them?
I still kind of feel like you think that you are the "majority". My experience seems to show that gamers (especially pen & paper gamers) are much more intelligent than the "norm".
I don't think I'm in the majority. I do think that a large part of what we see as intelligence has to do with environment and am suggesting schools are not the best environment for learning.
You could have done your scenario. Your kids could. My kids could. But there is a whole world out there where it wouldn't work at all.
I want my kids to have that chance but I can't afford to pay a dollar more for their education. I offer up to the state two children who enter kindergarten doing basic math, speaking two or more languages, reading three years above their age level, ... I just ask that the state not punish them for this by making them sit in classes that ask them to colour in the letter A and circle the picture with "more apples". I'm not saying that colouring the letter A and circling the picture with "more apples" is a bad thing. I just wanted differentiated instruction for my kids and I've been asking for it for years. Other parents on this thread have children with learning disabilities and want the same thing for their kids -- differentiated instruction. I agree with them. If schools can't hack it, schools need to be rethought.
Teachers get a bad rap. I taught 180 different kids a day. 6 classes of around 30 kids each.
I spend my life with teachers. I'm not attacking teachers.
How do you motivate someone who has spent the last 8 years figuring out how not to do work? Do you really think that the above scenario would have helped?
Yes. Look at biographies of troubled kids who went on to become successful learners. They may have been surrounded by caring and talented teachers but it was quite often outside of the school that the love for learning was sparked -- in prison, in the library, in the workplace. I think surrounding kids with stimulating learning environments and letting them explore their interests would be better than schooling as it looks today. Schools are very, very slowly being dragged BACK towards this way of teaching/learning.
One class was so bad and I was at my wits end. Nothing I did had any effect. Then I tried to time them on a worksheet -- "You have 5 minutes to complete this worksheet. Go." It was great -- 5 minutes of silence as they worked to do it -- why?
Level appropriate challenge? A clear goal? A well-designed task? Hands-on, engaged learning? Sounds like the kind of thing that a stimulating learning environment should contain.
Sorry, I'm rambling. I just have strong feelings about this. The teacher's job (as impossible as it is) is made easier or harder based on what happens in the kids' homes.
Agreed. But, what if we do stuff right in the homes? I'm not a perfect parent but I turn out good product. Why do I have to go around kicking myself for putting my children into a school system that is clearly not meeting their needs? It could! It could meet their needs! It wouldn't be hard. First, though, we have to kick our heads in gear and reimagine schooling.