I love when I don't take the time to edit my posts then notice all my typos when someone else quotes them (meaning I can't fix them 
) :lol:
) :lol:
dark underbelly of homeschooling
- Thread starter Rainey
- Start date
Help Support Rabbit Talk Forum:
akane":xdwav7kj said:
Orb weavers are the one spider I really like. The last two years we have had one build a web right outside my kitchen window and stay there all summer. The kids and I have enjoyed watching them.
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2010
- Messages
- 14,517
- Reaction score
- 23
:shock: I do like orb webs, but not quite that much. LOLakane":4qap6jsl said:
We homeschool as well.
Children are 9, 11 and 13.
Children are 9, 11 and 13.
MamaSheepdog
Well-known member
heritage":3pll9mry said:I love when I don't take the time to edit my posts then notice all my typos when someone else quotes them (meaning I can't fix them
I second that... Khan Academy, not Kahn... and I wrote it twice.
Just goes to show you just how far my brain will go in order to distance itself from higher math. :roll: akane":3pll9mry said:
:lol: When I was really young, I collected what I thought were tadpoles, and even shared some of my bounty with a friend. They turned out to be mosquito larvae. :roll:
heritage":3pll9mry said:
I just highlight the text I want and then hit the quote button at the top of the user's post. *Caution- there is a "glitch" where if you hit the quote button of a different member, the quote will be attributed to them.
I highlighted Miss M's comment, but then hit the quote button at the top of MY post instead of hers:
MamaSheepdog":3pll9mry said:
heritage":3pll9mry said:
:shock: "Living off of their spouses?" What a horrible and belittling thing to say... and to have your own mother then take that a step further. :evil: You should have told her that any money from the policy would quickly be spent paying for childcare and household help!
I think that it is terrible that so many families do not have the luxury of having one parent that can stay home with their children... and that role should be valued, not disparaged.
heritage":3pll9mry said:
I don't study it, and honestly cannot tell you where I picked the knowledge up. :shrug:
heritage":3pll9mry said:
That one makes me incredibly sad. People think that if children aren't subjected to cruelty and abuse that they will never learn to "stand up for themselves." I believe that raising children so that they are confident and secure in themselves is the key to that... not being belittled and bullied by other people.
heritage":3pll9mry said:
Sounds like a prime time to take a break and try unschooling. :mrgreen: Fair warning- it doesn't resemble "school" at all. Don't expect him to sit down and write out a report on his activities or anything. In fact, FirstPup has never written an "essay" in his life until enrolling in college... yet he got an A- on the last one he submitted.
heritage":3pll9mry said:This is SO my son! He was a night owl even before he was born, and still is today (unless there's a fishing tournament. With the right motivation he can wake up at 4 AM no problem
Yep! It is all about personal motivation! Queenpup knows better than to stay up late if she has work in the morning.
heritage":3pll9mry said:
Yes! Doesn't that just make your heart swell with pride? They don't treat younger kids like they are "less than" kids of their own age.
heritage":3pll9mry said:
Aww, thanks!
I am sure you are well on the way!heritage":3pll9mry said:
Yes, it is. When my kids were younger, it was often business owners that would guess they were homeschooled due to their behavior in their establishments.
heritage":3pll9mry said:
I remember that! That'll traumatize ya, all right!!! :x
heritage":3pll9mry said:
My kids are expert fire-makers. Since fire holds such fascination for young children, and our area is so dry in the summer, we implemented a rule when they were small; you can build a fire any time you want as long as you ask permission first. We didn't want them sneaking off into the weeds and lighting the mountains on fire. :roll:
They have been lighting fires since they were about three, I'd guess. We taught them to make them in a cleared area and build a rock ring to contain it, and the only time they were not allowed to build a fire was if it was windy and in the dry season.
Colliepup likes to make mud ovens and other structures- here is his latest creation on the left:
He loves to build a fire and roast hotdogs, marshmallows, bits of meat or vegis, or fill a can with water and bring it to a boil- just about anything to "play" with fire.
Miss M":3pll9mry said:heritage wrote:
Thanks for putting it into words, Miss M. I have learned to "censor" myself, never knowing how the company I am around will react to my thinking, but it sounds like we are on the same page
:lol: ...Yeah, I do the same thing. If you know where I live or have access to my address or could have access to it if you gave it a little effort, I'm going to be very careful what I say to you until I know where you stand.
Not me. I figure the proof of the value of homeschooling is looking them right in the face with the kids standing before them.
Miss M":3pll9mry said:she's gotten to see what homeschooling has done for her niece and nephew, and she's loving it.
That's fabulous!
Miss M":3pll9mry said:
So true!
Hubs considers himself to be an "unschooler" now as well. He feels a deep sense of betrayal about what was "done to him" in school. The dumbing down, aversion to learning and reading, the inability to look outside the box, the conditioning to not question authority, etc.
akane":3pll9mry said:
:lol:
alforddm":3pll9mry said:
We had a leopard spider (another orb weaver) that lived outside our kitchen when we lived in the suburbs before we had kids. Hubs and I would sit and watch her every night- she would first eat her old web, and then would build a fresh new one. We called it "Spidey TV" because we didn't watch TV back then either, and everyone at work would always be asking "Did you see such and such show last night?"
My favorite spiders are wolf spiders. We have some here that have fuzzy red butts, and I will often bring them into the house in the summer to hunt flies.
HOWsMom":3pll9mry said:
Hi HowsMom!!! Good to see you again!
MamaSheepdog":bq0wckhp said:
Ummmm... yeah... that's a LOT easier than how I was doing it
:lol: A BIG thank you for explaining that!! I don't think I have it figured out 100% b/c it doesn't look like previously quoted items are going to show up correctly, but I will know when I preview it for sure. MamaSheepdog":bq0wckhp said:
She's a bit of a... snot... to say the least. She's 23 and very few people enjoy being around her at this point b/c her moodiness can zap a room. We'll be having a good time, laughing, conversing, then she walks in and the whole atmosphere changes. She's a total grouch most of the time, and just like her mom, doesn't hold back voicing her opinions.
MamaSheepdog":bq0wckhp said:
I want to... I really do. I guess I don't know what to do with a totally unmotivated child
. He's gotten very emotional lately, having meltdowns over things he used to enjoy. I don't know if he's going through "growing pains" of an emotional sort or what's going on. It's not like we push him really hard... the drama is getting so old though. If it's not HIS idea, he doesn't want to do it. He just randomly starts crying and the reasoning never seems to make sense. MamaSheepdog":bq0wckhp said:
I have heard of some industries that are changing their tune for the employees they are searching for for that reason - they don't want cookie cutter people anymore.
I do wonder the true end goal in mind for some of the changes they have made to PS over the years...
MamaSheepdog
Well-known member
heritage":urb1i4xa said:
Compulsory schooling started with the intent of generating obedient citizens that would not question authority nor think for themselves, and to ensure that people would hold common beliefs. It is all about conditioning people to believe that they don't know what is important to learn- an authority figure will tell you what to study and for how long. It was also designed to habituate people to doing repetitive tasks over and over and over all day long so they would be willing factory workers.
Text below is copied from: https://feltd.wordpress.com/2010/09/16/ ... al-system/
After the defeat of the Prussians (Germans) by Napoleon at the battle of Jena in 1806, it was decided that the reason why the battle was lost was that the Prussian soldiers were thinking for themselves on the battlefield instead of following orders.
The Prussian philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762-1814), described by many as a philosopher and a transcendental idealist, wrote “Addresses to the German Nation” between 1807 and 1808, which promoted the state as a necessary instrument of social and moral progress. He taught at the University of Berlin from 1810 to his death in 1814. His concept of the state and of the ultimate moral nature of society directly influenced both Von Schelling and Hegel, who took an similarly idealistic view.
Using the basic philosophy prescribing the “duties of the state”, combined with John Locke’s view (1690) that “children are a blank slate” and lessons from Rousseau on how to “write on the slate”, Prussia established a three-tiered educational system that was considered “scientific” in nature. Work began in 1807 and the system was in place by 1819. An important part of the Prussian system was that it defined for the child what was to be learned, what was to be thought about, how long to think about it and when a child was to think of something else. Basically, it was a system of thought control.
The educational system was divided into three groups. The elite of Prussian society were seen as comprising .5% of the society. Approximately 5.5% of the remaining children were sent to what was called realschulen, where they were partially taught to think. The remaining 94% went to volkschulen, where they were to learn “harmony, obedience, freedom from stressful thinking and how to follow orders.” An important part of this new system was to break the link between reading and the young child, because a child who reads too well becomes knowledgeable and independent from the system of instruction and is capable of finding out anything. In order to have an efficient policy-making class and a sub-class beneath it, you’ve got to remove the power of most people to make anything out of available information.
This was the plan. To keep most of the children in the general population from reading for the first six or seven years of their lives.
Now, the Prussian system of reading was originally a system whereby whole sentences (and thus whole integrated concepts) were memorized, rather than whole words. In this three-tier system, they figured out a way to achieve the desired results. In the lowest category of the system, the volkschuelen, the method was to divide whole ideas (which simultaneously integrate whole disciplines – math, science, language, art, etc.) into subjects which hardly existed prior to that time. The subjects were further divided into units requiring periods of time during the day. With appropriate variation, no one would really know what was happening in the world. It was inherently one of the most brilliant methods of knowledge suppression that had ever existed. They also replaced the alphabet system of teaching with the teaching of sounds. Hooked on phonics? Children could read without understanding what they were reading, or all the implications.
In 1814, the first American, Edward Everett, goes to Prussia to get a PhD. He eventually becomes governor of Massachusetts. During the next 30 years or so, a whole line of American dignitaries came to Germany to earn degrees (a German invention). Horace Mann, instrumental in the development of educational systems in America, was among them. Those who earned degrees in Germany came back to the United States and staffed all of the major universities. In 1850, Massachusetts and New York utilize the system, as well as promote the concept that “the state is the father of children.” Horace Mann’s sister, Elizabeth Peabody (Peabody Foundation) saw to it that after the Civil War, the Prussian system (taught in the Northern states) was integrated into the conquered South between 1865 and 1918. Most of the “compulsory schooling” laws designed to implement the system were passed by 1900. By 1900, all the PhD’s in the United States were trained in Prussia. This project also meant that one-room schoolhouses had to go, for it fostered independence. They were eventually wiped out.
One of the reasons that the self-appointed elite brought back the Prussian system to the United States was to ensure a non-thinking work force to staff the growing industrial revolution. In 1776, for example, about 85% of the citizens were reasonably educated and had independent livelihoods – they didn’t need to work for anyone. By 1840, the ratio was still about 70%. The attitude of “learn and then strike out on your own” had to be broken. The Prussian system was an ideal way to do it.
One of the prime importers of the German “educational” system into the United States was William T. Harris, from Saint Louis. He brought the German system in and set the purpose of the schools to alienate children from parental influence and that of religion. He preached this openly, and began creating “school staffing” programs that were immediately picked up by the new “teacher colleges”, many of which were underwritten by the Rockefeller family, the Carnegies, the Whitney’s and the Peabody family. The University of Chicago was underwritten by the Rockefellers.
The bottom line is that we had a literate country in the United States before the importation of the German educational system, designed to “dumb down” the mass population. It was more literate than it is today. The textbooks of the time make so much allusion to history, philosophy, mathematics, science and politics that they are hard to follow today because of the way people are “taught to think.”
And then we have this...
THE PRUSSIAN-INDUSTRIAL HISTORY OF PUBLIC SCHOOLING
© Yehudi Meshchaninov 2012
The Prussian-Industrial History of Public Schooling
If you would understand anything, observe its beginning and its development.
– Aristotle
Although much has been written about the formation of public schooling in the United States (Kliebard, 2004; Pinar et al., 2008; Ravitch, 2001), most histories of public education overlook the true origins of state-sponsored schooling. First created in Prussia in the year 1716, compulsory state-sponsored education was engineered by King Fredrick William I as a means of solidifying the fledgling Prussian state into a uniform whole (Boli, Ramirez, Mayer, 1985).
Further developed by his son King Fredrick the Great, the Volsschulen, or public schools, were explicitly designed for the purpose of consolidating imperial power. As expressed by Thomas Alexander (1918) in his historic study of the Prussian Educational system:
The Prussian citizen cannot be free to do and act for himself; that the Prussian is to a large measure enslaved through the medium of his school; that his learning instead of making him his own master forges the chain by which he is held in servitude; that the whole scheme of the Prussian elementary school education is shaped with the express purpose of making ninety-nine out of every one hundred citizens subservient . . . The elementary schools of Prussia have been fashioned so as to make spiritual and intellectual slaves of the lower classes.
Concerned that “too expansive a course in instruction will awaken the spirit of ability within them,” (as quoted by Alexander, 1918, p. 31) King Fredrick systematically established a schooling model engineered to ensure that the “spirit of ability within” was permanently extinguished. Children were depersonalized and isolated from each other at an early age. Seated in rows, they were easily silenced, controlled, and forced to engage in rote tasks whose sole purpose was to inculcate obedience. Taught fragmented subjects that deprived them of context and perspective, their thinking was intentionally and systematically stunted. These practices shaped the curriculum of the Prussian public schools for over a century. As late as 1919, German public schools were described by German philosopher Kurt Eisner as “veritable
drill academy
To staff King Fredrick’s newly created Prussian schools, a novel sort of teacher was needed. Unlike centuries of teachers before them, these teachers were to operate under the tight constraints of the imperial bureaucracy. Now a cog in the large state-operated machine, the teacher’s role was drastically redefined. No longer an inspirational mentor or wise sage, the Prussian teacher was the first of a new breed— an educrat. Just like their students, Prussian teachers became widgets, standardized and replaceable. Stripped of the ability to make decisions, teachers operated under the same rules King Fredrick set out for all of his officials: "You have no right of initiative whatever” (as quoted by Dorn, 1931, p. 414). Part of an elaborate hierarchy of teachers, principals, superintendents, and other ministers, pedagogues were continually micromanaged, evaluated, observed, and assessed. This created an atmosphere of constant fear.
The students feared the teacher, who in turn feared the principal, who in turn feared the superintendent, who in turn feared his supervisor, up until the King. This fear was by design, and it was intentionally embedded system-wide. An integral part of his management strategy, the use of fear-based control stemmed from King Fredrick’s philosophy of mistrust. Clearly articulated by King Fredrick himself as “among one hundred officials you can always hang ninety-nine with a good conscience, for if a single official was honest it was much,” (as quoted by Dorn, 1931, p. 421) this perspective lay at the heart of the Prussian educational system.
This is the legacy of the Prussian model. Designed to ensure control, it systemically disempowers students and adults alike with ruthless efficiency. Infantilized and fearful, its members are left weak, conditioned to obey those in command. It was this system that Horace Mann transplanted to US shores in 1843. While Mann understood the Prussian models dark nature, he was seduced by its power, arrogantly supposing he could use it for “for the highest good (as quoted in Cubberley, 1920, p. 488-489)”. The appeal of being able to systematically control people’s mindset, and attitudes- what Mann called the “moral power over the understanding and affections of the people (as quoted by Cubberley, 1920, p. 488-489)” — was simply too strong.
Like the Platonian philosopher-kings of old, Mann and his colleagues believed that they should be the ones to determine the values and ideas best perpetuated into the future. After all, surely they, as the educated Protestant elite, knew better than rag-tag (and often Catholic) immigrants, what should be taught to future generations.
Mann’s rationalizations brought the Prussian design to the United States. Beginning in Massachusetts, where Mann was Secretary of Education, it eventually spread across the country, forming the foundation of the American public school.
Recognizing it as the perfect vehicle for social engineering, the early proponents of the Prussian design in America (rechristened as the American public school system) sought to utilize it to reshape society. Unabashedly proclaiming their distrust of the general public, these educators looked to surreptitiously undermine individual freedom and choice through the use of education. In the words of the Rockefeller
General Education Board (1906) “In our dreams . . . people yield themselves with perfect docility into our molding hands” (as quoted by Gatto, 2010, p. 8). These chilling words were echoed by William Torrey Harris, US Commissioner of Education (1889-1906): [Ideally] ninety-nine [students] out of one hundred are automata, careful to walk in prescribed paths, careful to follow the prescribed custom. This is not an accident but the result of substantial education, which scientifically defined, is the subsumption of the individual. (as quoted by Gatto, 2010, p. 13)
While the Prussians sought to deprive the individual of his freedom for the good of the crown, in the United States the good of society became the altar upon which personal freedoms were to be sacrificed. As described by Kliebard (2004) in his historic account of the struggle for the American curriculum:
[Social] Efficiency became more than a byword in the educational world; it become an urgent mission . . . To go beyond what someone had to know in order to perform . . . [as an industrial worker etc.] was simply wasteful. Social utility became the supreme criterion against which the values of school studies was measured.
No longer was school to be about learning or intellectual development. To optimize society, individual growth was to be surrendered for the greater good. Under these aggressive new policies, schools were to become an extension of the factory— an assembly line, systematically churning out students conditioned for their future lives as workers in the industrial machine.
Moreover, just as in Prussia, the lack of freedom and initiative was extended to include the teacher as well. Here too, it was in the interests of social-efficiency that these sacrifices were made. As described by
the founder of scientific management Frederick Winslow Taylor (1911):
It will be seen that the useful results have hinged mainly upon:
(1) the substitution of a science for the individual judgment of the workman;
(2) the scientific selection and development of the workman, after each man has been studied, taught, and trained, and one may say experimented with, instead of allowing the workmen to select themselves and develop in a haphazard way; and
(3) the intimate cooperation of the management with the workmen, so that they together do the work in accordance with the scientific laws which have been developed, instead of leaving the solution of each problem in the hands of the individual workman. (p. 114-115)
Adapted to education by social efficiency zealots, such as Franklin Bobbitt and Ellwood Cubberley (Pinar, 2008), scientific management became the preferred management style in schools nationwide. Like their counterparts in the factories, teachers were stripped of the power of “individual judgment” and left to work within the tight confines of a “scientific” curriculum.
Supported by the powerful business titans of the early 20th century, social efficiency quickly assumed a position of prominence amongst the leading educators of the time (Ravitch, 2001). Moreover, the social-efficiency model of simplified, work-oriented schooling was given additional support by the new field of educational psychology.
Heavily influenced by Charles Darwin’s evolutionary theory, psychologists such as Sir Francis Galton (1869) perpetuated the notion of inherited intelligence. Assuming intelligence to be a trait that is genetically transferred, they argued that children of poor, immigrant, or minority parents were uneducable (Oakes & Lipton, 2007). Such thinking was further extended by other prominent psychologists like H. H. Goddard (1914), who went so far as to propose mass sterilization for the “lower elements” of society. This unholy trinity– psychologist, who” proved” students were uneducable; social theorist, who argued that an educated student was not in society’s interest; and business leaders, greedy for obedient workers- perpetuated the Prussian model into the 20st century.
The history of the American public school system suggests a most disturbing fact; public schools are not failing at all. They are faithfully producing the results they were designed to generate; weak apathetic students with “the spirit of ability within them” forever extinguished (Gatto, 2009; Waronker et al., 2009).
In fact, public schools have succeeded beyond their designer’s greatest expectations. Despite tremendous advancements in technology, human rights, and social awareness, the system engineered in the 1760’s
by King Fredrick the Great still succeeds in dampening the creative spirit of its students, fostering mediocrity, and ensuring a subservient population.
Deeply ingrained into our collective psyche, the legacy of the centrally controlled, highly scripted classroom continues. Trapped in an educational model explicitly engineered to breed submission and apathy, it is not surprising that student results remain dismal.
http://school.namaya.com/newamericanaca ... oling1.pdf <--- Has full list of references on last page.
Thank you MSD! :clap2: I have heard bits and pieces of that over the years, but never the whole shebang together. We have read a number of things by Gatto. It's scary, really. It sounds too crazy to be true! But if it weren't true, then why are things the way they are today? I know at least one family that is planning on doing PS b/c they figure they are already paying for it with their taxes, so why would they turn around and pay for private school? Just another tactic, IMO.
And at one point in recent history (sometime in the last couple/few years), D.C. was wanting to make the compulsory age in school two. 2!!!!! I overheard a husband/wife teacher duo saying that we needed to require children to go to PreK because so many are coming into K not knowing anything (his wife teaches K) - but just a few short years ago that was OK. Just take them away even earlier And the way the Common Core curriculum is written it's widening the parent/child gap even more. Parents can't teach their children anymore, and textbooks are no longer allowed to be taken home so there's no way they can try and figure it out... so they have to send them to a tutor. Also, one of the examples that really got me was from a 3rd grade LA book... teaching the kids how to get their way using emotional words. The example used?
A My mom asks me to clean my room.
B My mom nags my to clean my room.
Which is the correct answer?
B.
It has the more emotional word. So now the child has that phrase in their head... fabulous. Just what I want my child learning. That I am "nagging" when I ASK them to clean their room. In contrast the curriculum we use is very focused on loving others, listening to mom and dad, treating siblings nicely, working hard, etc.
And at one point in recent history (sometime in the last couple/few years), D.C. was wanting to make the compulsory age in school two. 2!!!!! I overheard a husband/wife teacher duo saying that we needed to require children to go to PreK because so many are coming into K not knowing anything (his wife teaches K) - but just a few short years ago that was OK. Just take them away even earlier
And the way the Common Core curriculum is written it's widening the parent/child gap even more. Parents can't teach their children anymore, and textbooks are no longer allowed to be taken home so there's no way they can try and figure it out... so they have to send them to a tutor. Also, one of the examples that really got me was from a 3rd grade LA book... teaching the kids how to get their way using emotional words. The example used?A My mom asks me to clean my room.
B My mom nags my to clean my room.
Which is the correct answer?
B.
It has the more emotional word. So now the child has that phrase in their head... fabulous. Just what I want my child learning. That I am "nagging" when I ASK them to clean their room. In contrast the curriculum we use is very focused on loving others, listening to mom and dad, treating siblings nicely, working hard, etc.
heritage":340yma4a said:
In our house there would have been C If I don't clean my room my mother will confiscate the stuff I've left strewn around
I remember overhearing my son when he was just 4 or 5 and had a friend over playing with him. They'd been building with Legos and decided to go outside. Son said, "we have to put these away first" and the other kid said "let's just leave them" and son said "no, my mother will confiscate them" The other kid gave him a horrified look and hurried to put them away. Wish I knew what he thought confiscate meant--probably something involving explosives :lol:
Rainey":54fy4ehv said:
We have a similar rule. When DH first told them, "you clean it up or we will do it for you" the kids thought it was a great idea, until they learned what that meant. Evidently my oldest didn't think he meant it, found out the hard way that yes, yes he did :lol: . They are deep sleepers so they go to bed with a trashed room and wake up to find it nice and clean and.... oh, wait... where are my Legos? And my favorite shirt??? Moooooooommmmmmm! They are much more willing to pick up their junk now.
*SNORT* BAHAHAHAHAAAAA! I'll bet they're MUCH more willing, now! :rotfl:
Do you know what my history book is now? "Across the Wide Missouri" by Bernard DeVoto. An inch-and-a-half thick book spanning five (only five!) years involving the hottest seasons of the western fur trade! Next up, "The Anglo-Saxon Chronicles" by Anne Savage, which spans from Julius Caesar to the coronation of Henry II! Can't wait!
Do you know what my history book is now? "Across the Wide Missouri" by Bernard DeVoto. An inch-and-a-half thick book spanning five (only five!) years involving the hottest seasons of the western fur trade! Next up, "The Anglo-Saxon Chronicles" by Anne Savage, which spans from Julius Caesar to the coronation of Henry II! Can't wait!
Rainey":3rzwqgfo said:I noticed when I first got on RT--once I'd gotten a few basics about rabbits--that there were homeschoolers here. We started when it wasn't so well known and my two are all grown up but i'm still interested to hear how it's working for other people. And I like to see where kids' interests take them. Neither of mine went to college (to the horror of friends and relatiions--see subject line) but they've been able to keep on learning and doing what they love.
So this post is to say how proud I am of my son who has finally set up his own website for the instruments he builds. He started out making mountain dulcimers, then harps and hammered dulcimers, then mandolins and fiddles, then banjos and guitars. He's already sold over 20 banjos on Etsy and banjohangout venues. but this winter some other on line banjo folks told him buyers would expect a "serious builder" to have his own website. He'd rather be in the shop working with wood but he hung in there and even asked questions (a thing he hates to do) and now his site is up and running. He's at hoytbanjos.com.
Congratulations Rainey,
I think homeschooling is one of the best decisions we made. - both for our gifted children, and those with disabilities.
-- as long as homeschooling is schooling [learning, and exploring], and not "no-schooling" - I think it is a great blessing to all -both parent and "child". --
-- but-- although I detest the public school system, it is still better than ignorance.
michaels4gardens":1erzsulc said:
I agree--it's so easy to over-emphasize one side of an issue. Mostly I've had to respond to people who were appalled that my son and daughter weren't going to school or then to college. It's been a long time now since it was really an issue. Recently I met a new friend of my son's, a young man his age who was homeschooled which gave him time to pursue his interests in music by which he now earns his living. But when the topic of homeschooling came up, he had mixed feelings about it. He saw a lack of structure, too much chaos. And I've met children whose parents chose to raise them without setting any (that I could see) limits. And I preferred to be around them as little as possible. I guess it just comes down again to what our goals are. I don't do well with chaos and our daily life was somewhat structured. It wasn't a "school day" structure. There were things I expected my children to learn and to do--but they weren't part of any curriculum and I never did like jumping through a lot of hoops set up by someone else with no constructive purpose I could see.
People used to ask who taught our kids, me or their father. My daughter would tell them she was an auto-didact (she loved words and now writes in her free time) But I saw myself as a sort of reference librarian when it came to anything remotely academic. Otherwise I wanted them to learn self-discipline and balance--things they learned by doing practical work as well as by pursuing their interests
bikegurl
Well-known member
Hi everyone! It's been a while...and this is an old thread...so hopefully I don't get in trouble here! I couldn't resist adding my thoughts and experiences here,since this is a topic I feel quite strongly about.
I and all my siblings were homeschooled, quite successfully, I feel! I am now 26 and married with two littles of my own....that my husband and I fully intend to homeschool, or unschool - though I'm not sure how to do the required quarterly reports and IHIPs for that. None of my siblings or myself have attended college...so there's that! :lol: We are all friends and enjoy each other's company....which sadly seems to be rather uncommon. I am the only one that doesn't live with my parents anymore....and I live one mile down the street! We all have always been applauded for our work ethic....seems to be a common trait of homeschoolers.
The last two years I have been tutoring a child of a college professor....actually fully homeschooling him! He was failing at the fancy private school he was attending, and they apparently couldn't do anything for him... :shock: So, after helping him with his homework for one year (that experience actually is what convinced my husband to homeschool our offspring...) his mother wanted me to homeschool him! It was quite difficult since he has many issues and is an angry adolescent....but it was overall a positive experience. He improved greatly with the two years of my teaching, and is no longer hopelessly behind!
I do love teaching, and though I have absolutely no credentials, was able to successfully teach a 14 - 15 year old boy! I attribute that to the skills I was able to foster during the years of my own homeschooling. My mother had me teaching my siblings some of their subjects so I learned a bit that way! She used curriculum for our varying subjects, but she didn't stick to just one. And, she didn't restrict herself to the curriculum either.
Regarding the Latin roots of English...Mom did a program called English from the Roots Up with us. We had lots of fun with it! It covered both Latin and Greek roots.
I and all my siblings were homeschooled, quite successfully, I feel! I am now 26 and married with two littles of my own....that my husband and I fully intend to homeschool, or unschool - though I'm not sure how to do the required quarterly reports and IHIPs for that. None of my siblings or myself have attended college...so there's that! :lol: We are all friends and enjoy each other's company....which sadly seems to be rather uncommon. I am the only one that doesn't live with my parents anymore....and I live one mile down the street! We all have always been applauded for our work ethic....seems to be a common trait of homeschoolers.
The last two years I have been tutoring a child of a college professor....actually fully homeschooling him! He was failing at the fancy private school he was attending, and they apparently couldn't do anything for him... :shock: So, after helping him with his homework for one year (that experience actually is what convinced my husband to homeschool our offspring...) his mother wanted me to homeschool him! It was quite difficult since he has many issues and is an angry adolescent....but it was overall a positive experience. He improved greatly with the two years of my teaching, and is no longer hopelessly behind!
I do love teaching, and though I have absolutely no credentials, was able to successfully teach a 14 - 15 year old boy! I attribute that to the skills I was able to foster during the years of my own homeschooling.
My mother had me teaching my siblings some of their subjects so I learned a bit that way! She used curriculum for our varying subjects, but she didn't stick to just one. And, she didn't restrict herself to the curriculum either. Regarding the Latin roots of English...Mom did a program called English from the Roots Up with us. We had lots of fun with it! It covered both Latin and Greek roots.
