91 Responses to “Home Schooling … The Good …”  

1. 1 Jeanne Mar 16th, 2007 at 4:03 pm

   I should think about this more or write something myself, but I’ll provide this link to the Chronicle of Higher Education
   http://chronicle.com/weekly/v52/i17/17b01401.htm . I’m going to hope that you’re a subscriber, since it’s no longer available to the general public, but it is a great article that a prof wrote about homeschooling his own kids.

   As for the other stuff, you’ve asked no small number of huge questions! I appreciate your desire to learn more and hope that you’ll get some good links. I might recommend that you read some Illich, some John Holt, a good book called Family Matters: Why Homeschooling Makes Sense (even the Amazon reviews give a glimpse into the rich life homeschoolers can lead http://www.amazon.com/Family-M.....0156300001 ).

2. 2 Doc Mar 16th, 2007 at 5:53 pm

   Classical Unschooling - A 7 part series on providing a learning environment
   http://intothesunrise.blogspot.com/2005/12/part i-setting-stage-for-natural.html

   Goal Setting vs Scheduling - Teaching children to be goal setters
   http://intothesunrise.blogspot.com/2006/03/goal setting-vs-scheduling.html

   Secular Curriculum Suppliers - It’s not all about Jesus
   http://intothesunrise.blogspot.com/2006/03/secular curriculum-suppliers.html

3. 3 Andrea Mar 16th, 2007 at 6:27 pm

   I think the thing you’ve missed, and I’m not sure if anyone has pointed it out specifically, is that in any two homeschooling households, you are not going to find much similarity. It’s all different, like parenting.

   Many people follow some sort of method or philisophy, some don’t and some mish-mash it all together so it fits *their* family, rather than making the kids (the students) conform to the teaching style. Like your school example above.
   It’s not a one-size-fits-all. I can recommend things to other homeschoolers, but they are only “must haves” if they *work* for their family. We try things, and if it works, it stays until it no longer works, and if we try something that doesn’t work, we can quickly change it - unlike a school system that takes literally years to find out that a particular practise is not working in the classroom.

   Our family has done school-in-a-box to flat out unschooling (completly self-directed) to a lot of things in between.

   Your example of your family’s interest in birds is *exactly* what many homeschooling families are doing. How do you know your kids know things about certain birds? Do you test them? I’m sure you’d say “well, they just know - I can tell”. Well, that’s my answer.
   As far as them learnign things I don’t know - I either learn it first, learn it with them (more enjoyable for all) or they learn it on their own without me (more likely to stick, depending). I mean, I *did* graduate from high school and attend some collage. If I couldn’t handle passing along most of what *I* leanred - what does that say about my own education? Also keep in mind I live in a province in Canada where the literacy rate is SIXTY percent. All my kids read at or above their grade level, and I’ve been homeschooling for 13 years. I taught 3 of my 4 kids to read (actually, the last one taught herself…) and that’s better than my local schools can do.

   (Rhetorical, and in my case I leanred more before school and outside of it, but I digress. )

   If you really want to know the answers to all your questions, you’ll have to do a lot more reading. A LOT.
   My husband Ron’s blog: http://atypicalhomeschool.net/
   He digs more into the nitty-gritty of education philosophy.

   My own blog in the homeschooling category, and there’s 7 *years* worth of archives there, so if you go back and pick thru some things, you can see how it evolved over the years.
   This post of mine - http://atypicalife.net/blog/2005/06/08/the-hard-bits-nobody-talks-about/ - deals with the only real down side of homeschooling I have ever found.

   And I know a couple hundred homeschoolers, not counting the few hundred more online I come in contact with. All various levels of education, all walks of life, all different. Only one down side. (I know you’re read studies about how he parent’s income / race / education level affects students, but in homeschooling there is no difference.) i know everythign else seems almost too good to be true, or liek we’re getting away with soemthing, but it does work as advertised.

   We also run a small site with free blogs for homeschoolers. http://homeschooljournal.net/

   Feel free to vist the blogs there and observe. You’ll find that althugh there are a few families with similar methods and philosophies, that there are also some familes that do it completely differently. Either way, you’ll learn tons. And I do honestly think you would quite enjoy John Holt’s books, especially his earlier ones. You have similar backgrounds.

   In the end, a homeschooling family is an extension of their parenting - which would explain why we seem touchy at the way you’ve phrased some of your earlier questions. The knowledge - that is, the reguritation of facts - is less important than creating a learning environment where the child can learn as much as they are capable of, without us getting in the way or hindering them, one that helps them keep that drive to learn and that curiosity that they were born with.

   Think of it as individualized alternate education to the nth degree, with the parents taking full responsibility of the student. Not the teacher.
   Sorry if I’ve missed typos or letters, or if it sounds disjointed - as I write this, my 16yo was troubleshooting her mp3 player and my 6yo is doing scissor work and counting.

4. 4 COD Mar 16th, 2007 at 7:13 pm

   A typical day at our house:

   Kids up at 8 AM (and not out waiting for the bus at oh-dark-thirty)

   9:30 - 11:30 - “school”

   12 - 2: girls at farm (this comes first in the heat of summer) boy free to do whatever he wants

   2:30 - 4: “school”

   And that’s about it. 3 hours a day is all it takes to score in the 90th percentile on standardized tests. I’m not sure if it’s possible to put a name on our approach, but eclectic classical may come close. We sort of started with the classical liberal education approach laid out in “The Well Trained Mind” although we’ve diverged so much I’m not sure how much that really applies anymore.

   //Do home schoolers use textbooks? What do you think about textbooks? What are the alternatives?//

   We do for math - it’s very much an old school approach following the time tested algorithms for learning math. It works for our kids, your mileage may vary. English / Language Arts is similar. Those are really the only two places where we’ve followed a textbook / workbook approach that you would expect to see in school. My son started a 2 year curriculum for junior high science this year, biology, physics, and earth science. Book work 2 days a week and lab one day a week.

   //Do some home schoolers develop and use highly advanced IT resources, while others avoid these things, figuring that kids will have a huge amount of exposure to electronic gadgetry in this society anyway?//

   Even the most fundie homeschoolers use PCs and the web, although I’m sure they are far more restrictive than I about what their kids can do. I’ve got a web content filter set up and my kids can go anywhere on the web that doesn’t set off the porn filter. BOth kids have countless games loaded on their machines. Unlike the fundies, we are not HSing to steer our kids to a certain belief. If I find my son reading up on Mormonism it’s not going to cause a panic in the house.

   //How do you handle evaluation?//

   Homeschooling parents are there all day. It’s not like a school that won’t notice Johnny can’t read until he bombs on the state test at the end of the year. HSers see the shortcomings in real time and adjust immediately. In a sense, “testing” is sort of silly because we are there evaluating and testing their knowledge every day. Unlike schools that have a schedule to follow, we speed up, slow down, quit, jump ahead, etc as needed.

   //In my opinion, a large amount of what is learned in a traditional setting is lost within weeks or months.//

   Agreed. We don’t take the summer off (though we do slow down quite a bit) and that contributes greatly to retention. However, contributing to the lost knowledge is the fact that so much of what is taught is useless or not readily relevant to the kid. Make it relevant and it sticks. My son, who is a history nerd, simply does not forgot anything he reads related to history, because he enjoys learning it in the first place, and wants to remember it and apply it later. Likewise with horses for my daughter. Tie math to horses somehow and suddenly my daughter can retain it forever! Schools simply can’t customize on the fly like that.

   It’s really not about education with us anymore. It’s about the freedom not follow an arbitrary schedule that controls our lives. My daughter rides her horse when the weather dictates, not when the school schedule dictates. We go to museums and parks when we want to , not when we can fit it in around school and homework obligations. When the Red Sox visit Baltimore at the end of April you can bet my son and I will be there, likely on a weekday when he “should” be in school.

   Did I mention that we vacation in Sept when beach condos are 50% off and the beaches are blissfully empty because everybody else is in school?

5. 5 k Mar 16th, 2007 at 7:55 pm

   Andrea spelled out exactly what I was thinking as I read your post. The confines and systematic lessons of public schools is not something that’s necessary for most homeschoolers. We can, for example, explore ancient Egypt if that’s our kid’s passion - even though most kids don’t learn about ancient Egypt in kindergarten (”We’re not learning that right now, Bobby. Sit down and color your ladybug”). My eldest really was enraptured with ancient Egypt at age 5 - he is now 14 and he *still* remembers much of what he learned about ancient Egypt way back then *because it was interesting and important to him*. I think this, above all else is what’s important for kids - passion & interest in a subject.

   My son is exploring music with a passion right now. He is learning about the structure of songs, the math behind the music, different strings, different sounds and tones that come from each instrument. Not only is he pursuing playing, but he is learning about the culture of music, both mainstream (Clapton) and local (Hawaiian musicians such as George Kahumoku and Jake Shimubukuro). He’s reading about this topic, learning the science behind it, and gaining an understanding of the island culture.

   I know essentially nothing about music, and yet he is learning this. He has taken lessons from a number of teachers, has found mentors, participates in a regular “jam session” (mostly adults), and had the opportunity to attend a workshop given by a Grammy award winning artist. My job is simply to facilitate his learning.

   You’ll surely ask, “what about the things they really don’t feel passionate about, like math?” There is a minimum of knowledge that’s required for college entrance, and we aim to provide that for our kids. In our case, they do use a math textbook. But I am definitely not hung up on them knowing exactly what their public school counterparts know, exactly when they know it. They will gain the knowledge they need as they need it. In my book, so long as they know how to read, they can find out *anything* they’ll ever need to know in life.

   Happiness is paramount.

6. 6 HS Mom Mar 16th, 2007 at 8:11 pm

   Homeschooling at our home starts around 8:00 a.m. each day. DD is eight and “technically” in the third grade, however, she’s pretty accelerated in all subjects.

   We start the day with handwriting practice, followed by grammar and writing. We use a mix of materials (Shurley English, Excellence in Writing, copywork). We do Latin drills and work on declensions.

   Math typically comes next. DD is taking Algebra I with Thinkwell (www.thinkwell.com) It’s the same program that Johns Hopkins CTY uses for their upper level gifted math classes. DD also works on word problems through the Art of Problem Solving (www.artofproblemsolving.com). If she wants, she’ll be on her first competitive math teach next year along with some of her other home schooled buddies.

   History: DD is studying the Constitution and Revolutionary War (various books). Our library card is very abused.

   Science: Singapore Our Pals are Here Science, Real Science for Kids. DD is currently reading everything she can get her hands on about oceanography (tide pools in particular).

   Computer: DD writes her own webpages using HTML code. She will start a C programming course as soon as she finishes Algebra I. This is not my cup of tea. Thank goodness my husband’s degree is in computer engineering.

   Of course, there are some days where DD wants to work on math all day long, or program or read silly books all day long. This is fine by me…whatever floats her boat!

   We typically school for four days per week. I don’t want my child in college by the age of 12, so I don’t do more than that. On the fifth day, we’ll hit a museum or work on a big art project. On average, “seatwork” might take four hours per day. I’d prefer to get it down to three hours, but DD is very driven and she enjoys the work.

   Testing? We have to test at the local public school. DD scores in the 99% range in everything. She participated in Johns Hopkins Talent Search last year and she performed in the 99% range on that test as well.

   We tried to make the public school work. Thank goodness it didn’t! DD has never been happier at home. She has more friends than ever.

   I had never planned on homeschooling my child. I had no other choice. I’ll never send my daughter back to a traditional elementary/high school.

7. 7 ImPerceptible Mar 16th, 2007 at 9:26 pm

   >>how do you know what the kids know?

   I know what my two children know because I have been their teacher for all of the 9 and 7 years they have been alive. (even the two years my oldest was in public school) I know that my youngest has an amazing vocabulary and an ability to create with her hands. I know my oldest can read anything I put in her hands and great ability to read maps, charts and graphs. I know one gets nervous when she see’s a big word and the other balks at complicated math problems. One has an incredible visual memory and the other excels with a hands on approach.

   I know how they learn, what time of day they learn best, and what subjects are going to take longer to get through. I know more about what my children know than any other person on this earth. More than any teacher that has known them for three months or any test could tell me.

   I talk to them for hours out of every day. I hear them when they ask if the platelets are going to make a scab on their boo-boos. I listen to them when they pretend they are visiting The Great Wall of China. I make mental and sometimes written notes of what I need to focus on.

   I have a list of objectives and every few months I check off what they know. It goes something like - “Mom the rocket ship is blasting off 10,9,8…1 Blast off” - Can count backwards from 10 (Check) or “Mom it’s 3:47 we needed to leave for art class two minutes ago!” - Can tell time to the minute (Check)

   I know what they know because it’s my job. A job I and fellow homeschoolers take very seriously. When you spend the majority of your day with someone you love, you get to know them and you know what they know. It very simple.

8. 8 Meg L Mar 16th, 2007 at 11:48 pm

   Hey,

   First off, that wonderful article that Jeanne mentions from the Chronicle was posted by HE&OS a while ago. You can read it here: http://cobranchi.com/?p=5988

   Anyway, as others have mentioned. No one homeschools the same way from family to family, or within a family from child to child or day to day. Here’s some posts that might give you some feelings about our household.

   Typical Day? http://getinhangon.homeschooljournal.net/2006/10/01/typical-day-not/

   You asked about structure in a homeschool setting. Homeschoolers cover the spectrum when it comes to structure. I tend to lean toward more framework, but that doesn’t mean we limit ourselves to it - http://getinhangon.homeschooljournal.net/2006/05/28/how-to-plan-a-structured-year-that-flows-freely-with-your-day-to-day-life/

   I’ve got other posts about what each of the kids are doing and rather than sending you out to any particular one, you can find them in this catagory - http://getinhangon.homeschoolj.....lts-of-it/
   My basic point is getting back to your question about ‘teacher training,’ basically the kids lead me where their interests lie and I help them come up with a plan.

   As for evaluation, we don’t do anything explicitly. I go over the kids’ math and look over their essays, but everything else is a free-form discussion. If they can talk about it, they probably have a fairly good handle on the material.

9. 9 Serena Mar 17th, 2007 at 12:17 am

   I have been lurking on this website for some time now. It wasn’t until tonight that I felt moved to come out of the shadows. That’s especially thanks to ImPerceptible’s comments.

   Being a teacher in a public school, I never thought very highly of the homeschooling environment. I made many assumptions, fueled primarily by the media, about kids who are homeschooled. After reading nearly every comment related to homeschooling on this blog, I realize that my assumptions are wrong. I still believe that some homeschool environments (the fundamental Christian ones) leave children sheltered and close-minded. But this clearly is not the case in all homeschool environments.

   I believe what ImPerceptible says is true, “I know more about what my children know than any other person on this earth.” Teaching 4 different classes of 30-34 students each, I often feel that I don’t know any of my students well enough to tailor my teaching methods to their needs. (Despite the fact that EVERYONE is asking teachers to do just that these days.) It is only when I have the opportunity to work one on one with students, such as in a tutoring session, that I feel I can really get to the heart of that student’s learning needs. I can imagine how rewarding it is to do that with your own child every day for all of his/her schooling.

   I’m starting to think, what would it be like if I homeschooled my own child? What would that look like? Would I have the skills to teach every subject at every grade level? How could I ensure that my child would be well adjusted and socially adept?

   There have been many examples of what this would look like by those who have posted here. I appreciate all of them. I guess what I’m now wondering is, how did you make that initial jump from doing what everyone else does (sends their kids to school) to homeschooling your kids? It seems like such a life-changing event.

10. 10 Dawn Mar 17th, 2007 at 12:30 am

    Do home schoolers use textbooks? What do you think about textbooks? What are the alternatives?>>>

    My kids are 5 and 8.

    We didn’t use textbooks until this year as we were unschoolers. This winter we started to address a couple of subjects more formally and so we picked up Primary Math (’Singapore’ math) 3A and Key to Fractions (my daughter’s pick, she loves fractions). The Primary math is our main text, the Key to…book is the fun one and I also picked up the Math Mammoth series of workbooks for review and additional practice. We also use manipulative, play related games and puzzles, etc.

    Language Arts is Easy Grammar 3-4 and we do some copywork and lots of reading.

    That’s it for texts. Science is a lot of experiments, websites and reading. National Geographic magazines and Berkley’s excellent Understanding Evolution site ( at evolution.berkeley.edu) are our current favourites.

    History is covered as science is, websites and books. Also some excellent documentaries courtesy of P2P software. I’m in Canada, I’m allowed to do that.

    Mythology and critical thinking are two other things we tend to focus on.

    How does teacher training work in a home school environment?>>

    From the teachers I know who’ve homeschooled, it doesn’t. Different skills are involved and what I commonly hear is the training was either of no value or worse. Teachers and homeschoolers help kids learn but that’s about where the similarity ends. The skills required are no more similar then those of a carpenter and a worker at a furniture factory.

    Do some home schoolers develop and use highly advanced IT resources, while others avoid these things, figuring that kids will have a huge amount of exposure to electronic gadgetry in this society anyway?>>

    I know some avoid it but my husband and I are huge geeks so computers (you don’t want to know how many), games systems (you don’t want to know how many), etc. play a big part in our homeschooling.

    My daughter is interested in Ancient Egypt so we’ve visited websites, printed off resources, downloaded documentaries and will be playing games (Pharoah! Age of Mythology!). Technology plays an enourmous role if our homeschooling.

    Is there a sense or knowledge of OpenSource resources in the Home School community?>>

    Among the geeks, yes. I’m not sure of the general community though.

    Are there themes that work their way through all (or many) aspects of what you do, over the years?>>

    Oh yes though so often I don’t recognize them until after. They tend to wrap up the whole family though. Mythology in general seems to be running through everything we do this year. Eve science as we finally decided what belonged to scientific exploration and what belonged to mythical exploration. Though my daughter was not happy to learn dragons were not scientific and I had to admit my god wasn’t either.

    How do you handle evaluation?>>

    Just by watching and being with the kids.

    How is knowledge developed for the longer term, how do you review, how do you know what the kids know, how do you integrate earlier with later learned materials?>>>

    We don’t review really. In math there’s some review in the text but I find my kids, my daughter especially, retains something once she gets it. I know what the kids know simply because I’m beside them helping them, playing with them and talking to them.

    If you’re interested in my ‘day in the life’ I keep a journal at daybydayhomeschooling.blogspot.com. You’ll probably notice a familiar link there. After your other post on homeschooling I started reading your blog and it’s actually been one of my resources as we explore science and evolution in our house.

    Other interesting stuff? I don’t know. Probably how it’s changed my outlook on learning. I’m not a consumer of teaching anymore but an engaged and self-directed learner. Partly from the process of learning about unschooling and partly from watching the way my kids are fearless learners. Homeschooling woke me up from that apathetic state where I thought I needed someone to lead me through a course or text for whatever I wanted to learn.

11. 11 Dawn Mar 17th, 2007 at 12:34 am

    My son is exploring music with a passion right now. He is learning about the structure of songs, the math behind the music,>>>>

    Another thing homeschooling taught me! Different subjects are not different subjects. Math is music. Math is divinity (thank you Pythagoras), history is science, art is geography, etc.

    I tend to think that school breaks connections between subjects in order to serve them up in comfortable pieces during a school day. With homeschooling we can wander and see how one thing relates to the next.

12. 12 Not June Cleaver Mar 17th, 2007 at 7:34 am

    We are new to homeschooling this year. This is how homeschooling looks for us. At grades K, 2, and 4, we are not deep into academics yet. I truly believe that schools push formal academics much too early. Our school district has full day kindergarten, and 21 more county schools are adding that next year due to the push for test scores. Poor kids. We value our family and the love of learning and believe that the schools hinder both of those.

    [Serena, pulling them from school this year was the best (and most difficult) decision I have ever made.]

    //Nonetheless, “courses and classes” provide useful structure, or at least a useful framework. How do you get these benefits in a home school setting?//

    Since my kids are so young, we are learning more through living than through “courses and classes” at this point, but not entirely.

    My 4th grader is in a science class that meets for 1 1/2 hours once a week to learn physics. It is taught in someone’s home by a homeschooling mom with a science background. She teaches a group of about 9 kids ages 9-13. Each week she introduces concepts and they do an experiment to illustrate the concepts. Next week they are going to watch the movie “October Sky.”

    All the kids participate in another group that meets 2 hours once a week. It is a co-op type arrangement where the parents take turns planning field trips and/or unit studies. We just completed week 5 of a 6 week geography unit. Next week, the kids will all give presentations of their projects to the group (about 30 kids ages 6 to 15). We split the kids into two groups approximately grades K-3 and 4 and up. The younger kids have learned all the continents and oceans, how to say hello in a language from that continent, some important facts about that continent, and they are prepared to do a little skit for the group. It is the neatest thing to watch them as they learn! The older group was broken into 6 smaller groups of 3-4 kids and they are creating their own country on a continent. They have to learn about that continent and then decide what sort of climate, geography and culture their new country will have. They are having a blast with this unit.

    We take art classes through our county. In the fall, they took a 1 1/2 hour weekly pottery class. Now they are taking a 1 1/2 hour weekly general art class called “The Joy of Color.”

    They are all involved in soccer and gymnastics as their sports. We have a weekly “park day” where they get together with friends and run around for hours while the mom’s regenerate and rejuvenate by talking to each other and sharing ideas and complaints and whatever else they want to share.

    //Do home schoolers use textbooks? What do you think about textbooks? What are the alternatives?//

    Some do. Some don’t. Some do a little. We do some. Clear as mud?

    We tried Saxon math for the 4th grader. He hated it. It turned math into a tedious chore. We dropped Saxon (the schools can’t do that when something isn’t working!) and now we are trying some of the ideas from http:/www.livingmath.net and working on specific concepts to mastery with the Key Curriculum Press series “Key To….” We have some workbooks for the younger kids too, but we don’t push it. My K son is working at about a 3rd grade level of math, and my 2nd grader is right on track. We prefer to have fun with math. We do a lot of math games and we talk a lot about math (my husband is an engineer). Eventually I will push math, but for now we are just having fun learning the concepts and practicing real world math application. When we get outside our league with math, there are so many resources available (from online courses to self-taught courses to community college), we are certain that will not be an issue when the time comes. My husband used to solve differential equations for fun, so I doubt math will be a problem for us.

    We use various off-the-shelf curricula for language arts as well. You would be amazed at what is out there! I read aloud to them daily, and they each have their own books that they enjoy reading each day. We go to the library every Friday.

    For history we prefer to read great historical fiction and biographies rather than boring history texts. As someone above mentioned, the schools had to chunk out subjects for ease of teaching. Separating history from its context makes it meaningless and boring. I despised history as a kid. History was that stupid class where you had to memorize names and dates. Yuck. I got only three Cs in college — yes only 3 — and they were all in history!!

    //How does teacher training work in a home school environment? In other words, how to you determine when there is an area of knowledge that you want to develop with the child that the parent(s) are not comfortable with, and then what do you do about it?//

    I think the answer to that lies in my above commentary. We teach what we can, we get help where we need it. We are very fortunate to live in an area with abundant resources. We also have the internet.

    //Are there specific useful IT resources (software, hardware) that everybody else should know about because they are so good? Is there a sense or knowledge of OpenSource resources in the Home School community?//

    We definitely take advantage of technology and OpenSource resources (have you seen The Jason Project http://pilot.jason.org/preview/home.aspx? That is just one example). We are the ultimate geek household. The internet is amazing, and I’m certain that I would not have had the guts to bring the kids home were it not for that. With the internet, we have immediate access to the world. I have learned more than I ever knew existed about homeschooling. I’ve met some great people and groups and found tons of activities and resources. Couldn’t live without it.

    //Are there themes that work their way through all (or many) aspects of what you do, over the years? //

    This is one of the (many) cool things about homeschooling. We aren’t really there yet because we’ve only just begun, but I expect it will come.

    //I’m sure testing has it’s uses. But what about in a home school setting?//

    I see very little use for testing. As has already been mentioned, we know where our kids are and where they need help. Testing measures test-taking skills, not learning. Our state requires us to provide evidence of progress each year. We will take a standardized test (the California Achievement Test) that I will administer at home. Our co-op group also offers the Iowa Test of Basic Skills in a group setting following the publishers standards for administering the test. Testing is one of the hoops we have to jump through in order to keep homeschooling, so we will do it, but I place no value in the results. Cheating on it would serve no purpose. Our ultimate goal for the kids is to take the SAT (because that is what is required) and go to a great college. We will do whatever it takes to get to that point (and hopefully the kids will want that too!!!).

13. 13 Not June Cleaver Mar 17th, 2007 at 7:34 am

    FYI, I’m being moderated again, Greg. Please release me!!

14. 14 Chris Mar 17th, 2007 at 8:01 am

    All the information you are seeking is out there, much of it on the internet at the click of a mouse. Goodle home education for starters; visit some blogs and their links. You’ll get all your questions answered.

15. 15 Greg Mar 17th, 2007 at 8:25 am

    Please Note

    Just a quick word on moderation, etc., because there have been some questions (indeed, some accusations).

    This site is not moderated per se. If something is happening that makes you think this, it could be something with your browser. This site is a standard, stable, word press installation with a well tested out of the box theme, so things should pretty much be working at this end.

    If your comments have above a certain number of links, the comment goes in the moderation bin, which I check now and then (at least daily). Most comments with lots of links are selling viagra or pornography. If you need viagra or pornography ads, send me a separate email and I’ll send you the 6,000 or so comments…

    This site is protected by Akismet. If your handle or IP has been submitted to Akismet (or is like one submitted to them) as spam, then your post may get bumped over to this bin, which I do not regularly check. This is unusual but has happened twice (at least) to one commentator on this site.

    Despite repeated accusations by one rather rude commentator, I do not moderate comments or (at this time) exclude commentators, even though at this point I have been banned (because of my opinions and perspective) from one home schooling site, and my efforts to submit our earlier discussion to the Home Schooling Carnival were rejected!

    OK, these comments are great, I’ll step back out of the way now!

16. 16 Bonni Mar 17th, 2007 at 8:39 am

    http://myloveandlaughter.blogs.....l/Learning

    The above link is to some of the posts on my blog which discuss our homeschooling. I hope you find the answers yo’ure looking for.

17. 17 Nance Confer Mar 17th, 2007 at 9:43 am

    You’re concerned? Who cares!

    All of your questions could have been answered by doing just a little research online and irl before you set out to fix hsing by dismantling it.

    I’m not going to take your test. Take your concern and shove it.

    Nance

    P.S. Read about your “concern” on COD’s blog. Sorry, COD, but I don’t need “credit” from this guy.

18. 18 Not June Cleaver Mar 17th, 2007 at 10:18 am

    Greg, this happened to me on your other homeschooling post the other day. You were able to finally get my post to work. Why not now? Can’t you get my post out of spam blocker hell??

    My post showed up on my screen with the same big yellow banner that said my post was in the “moderation queue.” I’m just calling it what I see “moderation.” I spent an ungodly amount of time writing that post and I’m feeling whipped for wasting my time again. I do not add anything weird into my posts. The only thing I do is compose them outside your site (because it is easier for me than using this little box) and then I paste them into this box. Perhaps your spam blocker counts key strokes against length of comment and throws large discrepancies into the moderation queue??

19. 19 Not June Cleaver Mar 17th, 2007 at 10:22 am

    Thanks Greg! Sorry for freaking out, but when I type in these little posts to you, they show up fine. When I cut and paste my longer ones they don’t. I’m filling up your comments with crap because of it.

20. 20 Alasandra Mar 17th, 2007 at 10:29 am

    Hi Greg,
    You asked a lot of questions and I am short on time so at a later date I will try to do a post at Alasandra and answer the questions you asked. I also have several newbies to my homeschool group that the post would probably help. There are also older post at Alasandra & Home~schoolers Rule that address your questions.

    I actually homeschooled Shining Celebi totally differently then I am homeschooling Lord Epa. They both have very different learning styles and interest. Shining Celebi has been into computers since he was 6 years old, Lord Epa’s interest range from Gems & Minerals to Criminalistics. We don’t have filters on the PC’s, but they are kept in the study where it is easy for me to monitor what they are being used for.

    We use textbooks (one of the challenges I faced when I first started homeschooling was finding secular textbooks homeschoolers could buy; it’s way easier now). This year since I couldn’t find an American Literature book I like we aren’t using a textbook but reading books by American authors. There is a post on Alasandra about it. I am also going to do a lot of supplementing with the American History textbook I am using as I don’t think it covers topics enough in depth.

    Also if we get to take a neat trip we do research on the place we are going. When we visited Oahu we read a lot of books on Hawaiian history and had the chance to visit some of the places mentioned in the books.

    One of my favourite projects was the Friends and Flags project we took part in. We “meet” (online) a lot of very interesting people.

    I use test to determine IF the material we have covered has been mastered. If it hasn’t we review it until the material is understood and not just memorized in order to pass a test and then forgotten.

    Some of the things I like best about homeschooling is the freedom to use the method that works best for my child, the freedom to make sure the material is learned before we rush to the next unit or the freedom to advance to the next unit ahead of time if we master something easily instead of having to stick to some beaucrats time table, and the freedom to take neat trips when the opportunity arises.

    We learn languages together. I used Power Glide for the Japanese lessons we took, and I am currently using Power Glide for Spanish. When local museums, science labs etc have classes I enroll the kid(s), and there are tons of things online we take advantage of.

    Serena,
    We just jumped in once the decision was made. We were unhappy with the public schools our children were in (we love our home and didn’t want to move), the only private schools in our area are Catholic (and since we aren’t Catholic they weren’t an option) so that left homeschooling. I am very glad we were “pushed” into homeschooling.

21. 21 Stephanie Mar 17th, 2007 at 10:55 am

    Greg, I answered your questions on my blog: http://www.caerdroia.org/116/a.....o_and.html

22. 22 Not June Cleaver Mar 17th, 2007 at 3:57 pm

    I was afraid to post these links earlier because whenever I tried before, my posts disappeared. However, I can see that my earlier post worked, so I’m going to try.

    Regarding technology, here are two neat resources people might be interested in (even you, Greg!). We don’t have a great deal of use for them at this moment, but I bookmarked them awhile ago for future reference.

    http://richtech.ca/seul/

    http://ocw.mit.edu/index.html

23. 23 happymainemom Mar 17th, 2007 at 4:18 pm

    curriculum and schedule in our home.
    http://classicalbeginnings.blo.....culum.html

24. 24 yiela Mar 17th, 2007 at 5:23 pm

    Greg, in your post you say that there isn’t a lot of retention over time and I do agree. I have found that my kids retain information that we discussed over information that they read about, were lectured about, saw on TV or whatever. I think discussion is a huge tool for retention. I agree with COD that relevance makes a big difference too. If something is uninteresting or irrelevant to a child (or adult) they just don’t get it or remember it. I always try to slant things to the kids interests.

    When the kids were younger we did almost everything in unit studies. We didn’t have individual class subjects. I wrote or found all the unit studies and we didn’t use text books. Some only lasted one day and some went on for weeks. We did have regular school time. A couple hours a day. We used a lot of kid educational software too. The kids could use the software anytime (we didn’t have mindless or violent crap until they were older). We also tried to have a “learning lifestyle” for the adults as well as the kids. Read a book instead of TV and a lot of discussion about stuff. “I am replacing the faucet. Please help me figure it out…”. A lot of animal projects.
    When they were a bit older we started using some tutors and also an online school. We still did unit studies but also used some workbooks for math and other things. We had a Shakespeare period where we didn’t do anything but read Shakespeare. We started taking classes at a private school too. We did a few PBS online classes at this time. We did their “Evolution” and was great. We also did American history this way. One kid belonged to a great book club. We’ve always done 4-H. They both have followed their own learning projects over the years. We encourage performances, either at home or in public (usually at a 4-H meeting).

    Now one kid is in running start and the other is in a public school program for homeschoolers. He takes three classes there 2X a week and we do a class at home that we report to the school. We are not technically homeschoolers anymore but nothing has really changed for us. We still do the animal projects. Just a few weeks ago we were butchering turkeys and sorting through the guts to see how many parts we could name and compare them to what we know about the more familiar chicken guts. One of the turkeys had injured it’s wing as a chick and it was very interesting to see the wing from the inside as a grown adult. One kid is building a room in the basement and doing most of the work himself with help from dad and Home Depot. The biggest benefit (and maybe hazard for some) is that the kids have a lot of free time to follow their interests. The parent has to walk the fine line between supervising them and letting them be free.

25. 25 Myrtle Mar 18th, 2007 at 1:39 am

    Do home schoolers use textbooks? What do you think about textbooks? What are the alternatives?>>>

    One need not use a textbook approach for every lesson ever taught from cradle to grave. I use textbooks in many subjects with even my young children because I am lazy and I don’t want to cobble together lessons. I could live without them though if I had to with the exception of math.

    My goal isn’t to “cover” so much information within a particular amount of time but to make sure the kid learns it. That might take longer than a year. I remember when I was teaching in public school the teachers were faced with a few bad options if everyone in the class wasn’t working at the same level: Slow down and finish only half the book, or “get specific topics done” which meant covering them only superficially, or race through the book, cover the topics in depth and lose 90% of the class along the way. Of course when you are tutoring a single child it makes no sense to do anything but work exactly at that child’s pace and make sure he learns the topic in depth. In reality, the subject that is covered in a course doesn’t neatly compress itself, or expand itself, to exactly a three credit hour semester course like it does in a university. Making a topic fit within a year long course or a semester is an artificial constraint. For example, a unit of “origami” is worthy of maybe two months, but algebra II needs 18 months. When I teach a class in a homeschool setting I can teach what the subject requires rather than having to worry about fitting everything exactly into 18 or 36 weeks.

    I use books that have been used successfully in classrooms. Almost none of them are modern American commercial textbooks. I’ve worked hard to find books in translation as well as out of print books that had some particular approach or feature that was important to me.

    I want my child to learn Attic Greek so that he can read Plato and Euripides in the original before he’s 18. I have to learn it first. Given that I have successfully attained reading fluency in foreign languages in the past I have a reasonable expectation of being successful with Greek as well.

    There are areas in which I wish I had more expertise in, say chemistry, but I’m in a family of mathematicians so we’ll concentrate on that intellectual resource instead. I think it’s a trade off. My ten year old doesn’t have the same access to team sports and band let’s say, but on the other hand, if he were at our local school the fifth grade teacher isn’t going to be teaching the cardinality of finite sets. Other families have areas of expertise where we don’t and I suppose they would emphasize that asset. (Apprenticeship model of education)

    If I were very insecure about teaching some subject I would use a “curriculum in a box” which amounts to a correspondence course with an accredited private school.

    You mean “OpenSource” as in Linux or do you mean textbooks that are in the public domain?

    I use the tests that the curricula provide me . I have uncovered unexpected weaknesses but they have been things that only took a day or two of remediation to address. Nothing big.

    This is a problem in subjects which are built on a foundation of skills. However, I would never move forward through an algebra course unless my child were working at a B level. There is no benefit in rushing through a class if the child isn’t getting it. Furthermore, I have complete control over the summer gaps. Whenever Algebra II is done I can choose to go straight into Calculus and work through the summer. No summer brain dump. Not for the older child in math. Not for the younger ones learning to read.

26. 26 Tracey Mar 18th, 2007 at 2:13 pm

    Hi,

    Found your site through a link from another blog and thought I’d share what education is like in this house =)

    I’ve got two children; the first is a 20 year old son who is a genius. No homeschooling there, the kid was way ahead of me byt the time he was in the third grade. Our second child is 8 years younger. She began in the same Christian school that her brother was in, but she struggled from day one. Testing in fourth grade showed her behind in all subjects, anywhere from one to two years. She struggled with migraines and eczema. I decided to pull her out for awhile, and miraculously both issues cleared up within a week.

    Now, I know some kids will say “I’m sick” to get out of school, so I want you to know that wen DD had migraines that long ago, it was combined with days of throwing up. She’d miss up to a week of school at a time; this was no little thing. So the fact that it all got better showed the stress load this kid had been under.

    I home ’schooled’ for two and a half years. I’m not a conventional type person, I’m not in the least organized. No specific area set aside for work, no set times to work, not many traditional books or tools to work with. We centered things around farm life. She learned how to come up with the cost of each of those little bracelets she enjoyed making. She learned how much money was spent on the sheep, and how much her sheep alone would cost to feed for a year. Practicle stuff. Records were kept in her 4-H record book. She worked on her photography skills and put together scrapbooks. We went to movies, we watched documentaries on tv, we did a lot of fun stuff.

    She’s now in seventh grade. My husband didn’t think she was learning anything because he never saw a traditional learning environment. So, back to school she’s gone, and this time it’s public school. Guess what? She got an A on her last math test. Guess learning about the cost of running a barnyard came in handy after all.

    Anyway, my dad always said “The brain can only retain what the seat can endure.” Every kid is different, some retain better than others when sitting on a hard chair in a classroom situation. My method worked well enough for DD, but it won’t work for others. I think traditional public school teachers realize this as well, but let’s face it, they’re rather limited in what they can do when they’ve got 30 kids in a class room, eh?

27. 27 yiela Mar 18th, 2007 at 9:43 pm

    I wrote a big long bla bla but decided to cut it down a lot. Hope it still makes sense, if it ever did.
    In the real world we can’t put a hold on homeschooling until the bugs are worked out and it’s not fair to hold homeschooling up to some non-existant ideal. It’s not easy being an underdog, especially if you tend to be a little paranoid to begin with. You’ve got to understand that most of us have taken crap from almost everyone we know and from total strangers that see our kids at the grocery store during the day. We spout test scores because people question our kids abilities. We are reluctant to give details sometimes because people will find something wrong with what you do no matter what you do. Yeah, there are a lot of nutso homeschoolers but most of them (all of them that I know) are the product of public school education. What does that mean? It means that there are a lot of other factors that contribute to what a person does than their education.

28. 28 yiela Mar 18th, 2007 at 9:54 pm

    Hey, I hope I didn’t sound too grumpy in my last post. I’m not reading the COD site (just don’t have time) so I didn’t realize that things were getting cranky.

29. 29 Chris Mar 19th, 2007 at 11:41 am

    Hi Greg,

    I wanted to respond to both of your recent posts on home schooling. I probably won’t finish in this post.

    1. You bring up the perceived problem with home schooling that it is “selfish behavior,” and “contributes broadly to a lowering of quality of experiences for everyone else.”

    I believe I understand the point you are trying to make, but must disagree, especially without any data to the contrary.

    To carry your argument one step further, I would have to say then that you and all others with children in public schools much then be willing to share your resources with less economically advantated systems. Would it not be just as “selfish” for you to keep your children, but virture of your economic status and ability to live in a certain area, in a thriving school system while most inner city public schools experience a myriad of economic and other struggles? I suggest a foray into books by Jonathan Kozol. You are able to keep your children in a positive school system because of “differential distribution of resources.” I agree. This is America. America “allows for such selfish behavior.” That is using your words. I don’t personally see it as selfish. It is a heart breaking problem all around, not easily solved and certainly not solved by abolishing home education. Perhaps it could even begin to be remedied by providing more resources for home schooling to take place among inner city populations.

    My other issue with this argument, is that I’m just not sure how many home schoolers it holds true for. I have more time, because I home school. If my children were in public school, I would need to work close to full time in order to cover the additional expenses of the school system from the activity fees to the endless supply list handed out at the beginning of the year. I would not have the time to invest in classroom activities and even my own children that I have now. I already support the school system through my property taxes. We live in a home school friendly district and while I have not taken advantage of their offering, I am grateful for them but understand each district has the responsiblity for establishing its own policies.

    Your second point is that “home schooling, on average, provides chidren with fewer resources of lower quality.” Again, without any actual statistics cited it is difficult to substantially comment on this. I doubt that it is true. Again, you are referring only to those districts in economically advantaged segments of society. To some extent it would be true, but for the most part I can provide my children with access to anything they show an interest in. I do not have any scientifically oriented children right now; they cover basics and I can find all the basic equipment they need: microscopes, experiments, dissecting materials, etc… If one showed great interest in astronomy, we would have access to a local planetarium. In actuality, they have deeper access to those resources that they have an interest in. I grew up in a middle class school system and cannot think of anything I was provided with that I cannot provide my children with. The benefit is that I can provide them with a deeper involvement, not just 40 minutes a week.

    Those home educated students “getting vouchers,” most likely are counted then as part of the school system. There is no free lunch :).

    3. You state that home schooling provides children with a lower quality of teaching. I graduated summa cum laude with a secondary education degree in communications, English, and theater. I have learned ever so much more about teaching methods, learning styles and education from teaching my own children than I ever learned in school. Because I care so much more. Now, I never taught in the school system and I’m sure I would have learned much through that as well. Your statement that institutional teachers are “better” is too nebulous to debate. Safer? Well, then the only logical answer is to remove all chidren from their homes and into an institutional setting. Yet, that doesn’t work. “More appropriate?” Again too nebulous.

    Using outside educators is “acknowledgment that home schooling is at the base very limited.” This is the opposite of what is true. My children for the most part self-teach; when they run into a problem we find a resource to answer that problem. That is so much more like real life; they are not limited to one teacher, one school, one building, etc… It opens a world of possibilities to them.

    4. Home schooling is ideologically driven. I guess I don’t see the problem, except that you are concerned that that ideology disagrees with yours. I understand the struggle. I’ve heard of home school situations that I totally disagreed with both in substance and method. But just because I disagree with them, does not mean they are illegal, immoral or unethical. Even when those people are teaching their children things that I totally disapprove of personally.

    5. Oversight and Testing. I live in a state that requires a test or evaluation by a certified teacher each year. I don’t have a problem with that and have found both useful and helpful. With a background in testing I understand the limits. However, I have gleaned useful information from testing. And in my state, the students only have to meet the state standard which is the 25th percentile.

    I understand both sides of this issue. I think the biggest problem is the inability to have constructive communication because of the rudeness on both sides. Then again, when someone is “messin’ with my kids” I get heated too :).

    You state that the “cases where teachers screw up are in fact known because it is a system with a certain degree of oversight.” Well. Again, my experience and the experience of countless others is that a mediocre or even poor teacher and go on teaching for years and years and years without anything being done. An abusive teacher can go on for years without anything being done. Until the public school system has erradiated these problems themselves, I don’t think they should be holding home educators accountable. Instead, many problems and issues, etc… are becoming worse, more volatile, etc… If “society” wants to hold me responsible for how I educate my children, then do I not have the same right to hold “society” and the school system responsible for failing to resolve a failing system?

    I apologize in advance for any poor grammar, punctuation, spelling, etc… I’m writing and submitting, not editing and proofing.

30. 30 Chris Mar 19th, 2007 at 12:05 pm

    Hello again,

    A couple more responses on the first article:

    Your response to COD seems to summarize your basic concerns about home education. You don’t like that people can espouse different beliefs than you do and articulate them. You don’t like that someone can share their religious beliefs with your daughter. Why not? She is free to accept or reject them. Do you have the same problem with having differing political ideologies represented? Why does your wife not use those questions as a teaching tool? If they happen as frequently as your comments suggest, she should be prepared. And bottom line is you are stating that Christian beliefs should not be allowed to be expressed. Ever. What do you do with the Christians who believe that evolution should not be allowed to be expressed? Both sides sit in the sandbox, stomping feet and pulling on the same pail. You win because you’re “right” and they’re “wrong.”

    And if public support or sanction should depend on the ability to get numbers, then I get to keep my property taxes and certainly not give them to the public school systems who in my estimation have dismal numbers.

    Here is a response to your second article.

    You believe that a great advantage to the traditional system is that courses are already established. The amount of home school material, traditional and otherwise, is incredible. It is difficult to choose between the better and the best options! These are easy to research on the internet.

    Teacher training works like “real life” works. There is a need in a child. The teacher/parent seeks out what is needed to meet that need: materials and methods. Again, easy to research on the internet.

    IT resources – depends on the need of the student and family.

    Testing – I’m not quite sure how this relates to George Bush as it was an issue when I was in school and in college. Evaluation is handled family by family, state by state, need by need. My children cover some subjects as required by law, retaining a typical amount. They cover other subjects in great depth because of interest, retaining a great deal. My son, when he was 10, knew more about the Civil War than I ever will.

    Again, all this is easily researched on the internet which is how many home schoolers begin to research! Doc’s site is an awesome resource.

31. 31 Greg Mar 19th, 2007 at 1:13 pm

    Chris:

    I had committed to not responding to posts on this thread, but your second comment addresses something from another thread that I do want to respond to, by way of clarification.

    It is simply not true, not what I said, etc., that I have a problem with people having other beliefs. Nor is it a problem that my daughter be exposed to a range of beliefs. There is no way that even a casual reading of what I’ve said could conclude that, so I have no idea where you are coming from with this. Perhaps you are mistaking something someone else said.

    I do not want any religious beliefs being imposed on my daughter in public school. Not because she can’t handle that, she can. But because it is a more general violation of the rights of the children in the schools.

    This is well established law and practice. When you see these things happening in public schools … and it happens … it is always a violation of school policy, and it is obnoxious.

    I do not complain when we are at relatives and people start praying for dinner. My wife, daughter and I attend all of the religious gatherings in our family, which consists of lutherin, catholic, and jewish (the first two have the same gatherings, obviously). I wear the beanie during Yom Kippur, and my daughter and I both read from the Torah as expected. I do this for the Jewish ceremonies because they are relatively interseting (compared to what I grew up on) and because, since it is possible to be a “good Jew” and an atheist at the same time, I have more personal comfort!

    And of course I do it for the food. The food at all of the holidays, christian and jewish, is great.
    My daughter is of course free to not participate.

    (Sorry, I may have been getting off the point there)

32. 32 Chris Mar 19th, 2007 at 5:06 pm

    Hey Greg,

    Well, it was in the “rant” section of your comment :). You expressed some incredulity about your daughter’s being offered the opportunity to ask Jesus into her heart. It sounded to me as if that offer were coming from another student, but perhaps I’m wrong. When I was in public school, I was offered many things, including the opportunity to attend a Christian function, drugs, dates, etc… by other students. It never occurred to me they represented the system or anyone other than themselves. It never occurred to me to be offended although I turned down many of the various offers.

    Now, if you’re talking about a teacher using class time to do this…that’s a whole other topic and a whole other debate, and frankly, I’m not sure where I come down. And partially the reason I have chosen to home educate…so that there can be open communication about a variety of beliefs/systems etc… without any one being made to feel stupid or less than which certainly is what happens to much Christianity in the public school system. What is religion? Whose ideaologies should be propogated? Mine?
    Evolutionists only?

    Well, I am not a scientist. However, I have met, interacted with or learned from extremely well educated, well spoken, awesome individuals who are evolutionists, creationists, intelligent “designists” and Christians evolutionists. The problem that I see isn’t a lack of information, but a lack of willingness to communicate and allow for different conclusions. Speaking only anecdotally, I have run across an unwillingness to debate or discuss the ideas much more often from the side of the evolutionist who refuses to enter into communication with a creationist because of an opinion that “all creationism is based on religion.”

    You know, as a scientist, that there have been many periods of history where science was not allowed to be taught. We look back at that and shake our heads, but the lesson of respecting other viewpoints remains to be learned. That respect should carry over to public school, private school, and life in general.

    As I have entered cyberworld on an albeit limited basis, the one group I seen ridiculed and slandered more than any other are fundamentalist Christians. Most often there is not any sort of definition of what that even means and usually I get the sense that people are reacting to an experience they have had with a particular group or person. Perhaps rightly so! “Fundamentalist Christians” may or may not accurately represent Jesus and/or the Bible. Certain “fundamentalist scientests” may or may not accurately represent evolution. But I will stand by the idea that every viewpoint and certainly every person deserves respect.

33. 33 yiela Mar 20th, 2007 at 1:21 am

    Chris, sure everyone’s view point should be respected but, that’s not what IDists want. They want their “theory” taught in school science classes. That’s a whole different thing than getting respect. These folks do have an agenda and it’s not about sharing respect. Yes, I am respectful of their opinions but I know that lines must be drawn about the reach of those opinions because if there are no lines then they will go all the way. They really believe their beliefs, I will give them that.

    Greg, I’ve been thinking about the homeschool reaction you have gotten to your article. You hit most of the tired cliché criticisms that we all deal with all the time and then you ended off with suggesting that maybe homeschooling should be put on hold till the bugs are worked out. OK, this is something we are all tired of hearing topped off with a vaguely threatening suggestion but it’s no excuse for acting like a bunch of jerks. It reminds me of a friend of mine whose driveway is an easy turn around in a spot where people often want to turn around. He goes nuts whenever he catches someone using his driveway as a turnaround. He often complains to his friends about the idiots that use his driveway and how, no matter how many times he yells at those idiots that they still turn around in his driveway. Could it be that they are not the same people and they don’t know how much this bothers him? He seems to have no clue. If we homeschools act like a bunch of insane jerks every time someone questions us then we are…insane jerks. No, we don’t owe everyone a full disclosure. But if you don’t feel like dealing with it in polite manner then don’t engage in the discussion. This guy Greg is not every person that you’ve ever discussed this with.

34. 34 Dawn Mar 20th, 2007 at 8:26 am

    But I will stand by the idea that every viewpoint and certainly every person deserves respect.>>>>>>

    Every person, yes. Every viewpoint, no. Especially when it comes to creationism where the demands of trying to shoehorn it into science to justify a viewpoint warp the definition of science and break people’s understanding of and relationship with science.

    Nevermind the damage done to our relationship with myth and storytelling which seem to equal, in many creationists minds, nothing more then lies.

35. 35 Chris Mar 20th, 2007 at 9:43 am

    Dawn,

    If you refuse to respect my viewpoint, I don’t know how you will communicate respect to me as a person. Especially in such a way that will get me to listen to yours. By refusing to enter into a respectful discussion you are saying you are right, and you won’t play with anyone who disagrees with you. I am not saying you need to agree with me.

    Yiela, I have heard respect and disrespect from people on ALL sides of this issue. IDists don’t corner the market. Read the rest of this blog and the comments thereon for proof.

    Someone needs to be the first to stop the nastiness. It needs to stop one person at a time.

36. 36 Dave Mar 21st, 2007 at 4:33 am

    Chris,

    Do you really see no difference between respecting a person and respecting the particular views he holds?

    If someone posted here announcing that he sincerely believed the earth to be flat, would you honestly respect his view on this? And, would you really be unable to respect him as a person simply because you saw that his flat-earth view was nonsense?

    I have a Ph.D. in theoretical physics – I’ve looked over some of the Intelligent Designers’ stuff. The stuff I’ve seen makes simple errors in physics, the sort that should cause you to flunk frosh physics.

    I have no more respect for the ID views that I have seen than I have for the flat-earth view. Both are clearly nonsense.

    Of course, maybe there is some smart IDer out there whom I’ve missed. Neither I not anyone else can read every single word that every IDer in the world has ever written. C’est la vie.

    I do respect your legal right to hold your views, to espouse those views in public places (with permission of the property owner – no tresspassing, please!), to teach your views to your kids, etc.

    But I can no more respect the creationist views I have seen than you can honestly respect the flat-earth view. Some things are not possible.

    Dave M. in Sacramento

37. 37 Chris Mar 21st, 2007 at 7:35 am

    I think it’s coming down to semantics. Dave, what I’m saying is that if you refuse to enter into a discussion with someone who holds a differing viewpoint, because you disagree with that viewpoint and think any conclusions they have reached are irrelevant and just plan stupid, and furthermore view “them” as the enemy, trying to take over the educational system to the detriment of all others…well, I don’t think the dialogue will go very far. And I see this unwillingness to dialogue on all sides of this issue.

    By respect, I’m really saying respecting someone’s right to hold that viewpoint AND holding out a “nano” of your mind that they might be right, or at least have something valuable to add to the dialogue, even if that is only to cause you to explain your beliefs more accurately. Obviously at some point everyone needs to just call it a day and walk away from the table. But the goal should be that that happens with mutual respect.

    I know of folks with all kinds of Ph’s after their names who have reached different conclusions than you have based on the same data. They would view your conclusions as flawed as well.

    How many places in life are valuable ideas stopped and creativity shut down because of lack of respect for people and ideas? Politics, arts, sciences, home schooling, public education, religion, pro-life/pro-choice…pretty much across the board.

    If you look at me and tell me my views are “clearly nonsense” we really have no platform for dialogue, and in my opinion everyone loses.

    I have had my views and my life challenged by my forays into the world of the internet on sites and blogs that espouse views fairly opposite to what I hold. I have not changed my core beliefs, actually they have been strengthened; I have been challenged to live more accurately, fully, and compassionately. I enjoy having my beliefs challenged; it would be a more productive (and enjoyable) experience without the snarky, condescending comments.

    If respect means to hold in esteem, I don’t respect the flat earth view. But I would be fascinated to learn what causes someone to hold it, and what the implications are for them in their life. In the sense that respect means to give consideration to, I can respect their ideas. I can listen to them, knowing full well that I will never agree with them.

38. 38 Dawn Mar 21st, 2007 at 7:57 am

    If respect means to hold in esteem, I don’t respect the flat earth view. But I would be fascinated to learn what causes someone to hold it, and what the implications are for them in their life. In the sense that respect means to give consideration to, I can respect their ideas. I can listen to them, knowing full well that I will never agree with them.>>>>>>>

    You mean you can respect a person without respecting their views. Which is, I believe, what I said.

39. 39 Chris Mar 21st, 2007 at 8:17 am

    OK :).

40. 40 Nance Confer Mar 21st, 2007 at 10:46 am

    I know of folks with all kinds of Ph’s after their names who have reached different conclusions than you have based on the same data.
    ***
    Really, Chris? You know people who hold doctorates in biology, or a related field, who don’t think evolution is supported by the evidence? Who have some sort of evidence that creationism or ID are correct, supported in science?

    I’d love to find out who these people are.

    Nance

41. 41 Chris Mar 21st, 2007 at 11:18 am

    My point was that people can be intelligent and believe in creation science. I did not specifcally state any specific degree. But here is a list of creation scientists:
    • Dr. Paul Ackerman, Psychologist
    • Dr. E. Theo Agard, Medical Physics
    • Dr. James Allan, Geneticist
    • Dr. Steve Austin, Geologist
    • Dr. S.E. Aw, Biochemist
    • Dr. Thomas Barnes, Physicist
    • Dr. Geoff Barnard, Immunologist
    • Dr. Don Batten, Plant physiologist, tropical fruit expert
    • Dr. John Baumgardner, Electrical Engineering, Space Physicist, Geophysicist, expert in supercomputer modeling of plate tectonics
    • Dr. Jerry Bergman, Psychologist
    • Dr. Kimberly Berrine, Microbiology & Immunology
    • Prof. Vladimir Betina, Microbiology, Biochemistry & Biology
    • Dr. Raymond G. Bohlin, Biologist
    • Dr. Andrew Bosanquet, Biology, Microbiology
    • Edward A. Boudreaux, Theoretical Chemistry
    • Dr. David R. Boylan, Chemical Engineer
    • Prof. Linn E. Carothers, Associate Professor of Statistics
    • Dr. David Catchpoole, Plant Physiologist (read his testimony)
    • Prof. Sung-Do Cha, Physics
    • Dr. Eugene F. Chaffin, Professor of Physics
    • Dr. Choong-Kuk Chang, Genetic Engineering
    • Prof. Jeun-Sik Chang, Aeronautical Engineering
    • Dr. Donald Chittick, Physical Chemist (interview)
    • Prof. Chung-Il Cho, Biology Education
    • Dr. John M. Cimbala, Mechanical Engineering
    • Dr. Harold Coffin, Palaeontologist
    • Dr. Bob Compton, DVM
    • Dr. Ken Cumming, Biologist
    • Dr. Jack W. Cuozzo, Dentist
    • Dr. William M. Curtis III, Th.D., Th.M., M.S., Aeronautics & Nuclear Physics
    • Dr. Malcolm Cutchins, Aerospace Engineering
    • Dr. Lionel Dahmer, Analytical Chemist
    • Dr. Raymond V. Damadian, M.D., Pioneer of magnetic resonance imaging
    • Dr. Chris Darnbrough, Biochemist
    • Dr. Nancy M. Darrall, Botany
    • Dr. Bryan Dawson, Mathematics
    • Dr. Douglas Dean, Biological Chemistry
    • Prof. Stephen W. Deckard, Assistant Professor of Education
    • Dr. David A. DeWitt, Biology, Biochemistry, Neuroscience
    • Dr. Don DeYoung, Astronomy, atmospheric physics, M.Div
    • Dr. David Down, Field Archaeologist
    • Dr. Geoff Downes, Creationist Plant Physiologist
    • Dr. Ted Driggers, Operations research
    • Robert H. Eckel, Medical Research
    • Dr. André Eggen, Geneticist
    • Dr. Dudley Eirich, Molecular Biologist
    • Prof. Dennis L. Englin, Professor of Geophysics
    • Prof. Danny Faulkner, Astronomy
    • Prof. Carl B. Fliermans, Professor of Biology
    • Prof. Dwain L. Ford, Organic Chemistry
    • Prof. Robert H. Franks, Associate Professor of Biology
    • Dr. Alan Galbraith, Watershed Science
    • Dr. Paul Giem, Medical Research
    • Dr. Maciej Giertych, Geneticist
    • Dr. Duane Gish, Biochemist
    • Dr. Werner Gitt, Information Scientist
    • Dr. Warwick Glover, General Surgeon
    • Dr. D.B. Gower, Biochemistry
    • Dr. Dianne Grocott, Psychiatrist
    • Dr. Stephen Grocott, Industrial Chemist
    • Dr. Donald Hamann, Food Scientist
    • Dr. Barry Harker, Philosopher
    • Dr. Charles W. Harrison, Applied Physicist, Electromagnetics
    • Dr. John Hartnett, Physicist and Cosmologist
    • Dr. Mark Harwood, Satellite Communications
    • Dr. George Hawke, Environmental Scientist
    • Dr. Margaret Helder, Science Editor, Botanist
    • Dr. Harold R. Henry, Engineer
    • Dr. Jonathan Henry, Astronomy
    • Dr. Joseph Henson, Entomologist
    • Dr. Robert A. Herrmann, Professor of Mathematics, US Naval Academy
    • Dr. Andrew Hodge, Head of the Cardiothoracic Surgical Service
    • Dr. Kelly Hollowell, Molecular and Cellular Pharmacologist
    • Dr. Ed Holroyd, III, Atmospheric Science
    • Dr. Bob Hosken, Biochemistry
    • Dr. George F. Howe, Botany
    • Dr. Neil Huber, Physical Anthropologist
    • Dr. Russell Humphreys, Physicist
    • Dr. James A. Huggins, Professor and Chair, Department of Biology
    • Evan Jamieson, Hydrometallurgy
    • George T. Javor, Biochemistry
    • Dr. Pierre Jerlström, Creationist Molecular Biologist
    • Dr. Arthur Jones, Biology
    • Dr. Jonathan W. Jones, Plastic Surgeon
    • Dr. Raymond Jones, Agricultural Scientist
    • Prof. Leonid Korochkin, Molecular Biology
    • Dr. Valery Karpounin, Mathematical Sciences, Logics, Formal Logics
    • Dr. Dean Kenyon, Biologist
    • Prof. Gi-Tai Kim, Biology
    • Prof. Harriet Kim, Biochemistry
    • Prof. Jong-Bai Kim, Biochemistry
    • Prof. Jung-Han Kim, Biochemistry
    • Prof. Jung-Wook Kim, Environmental Science
    • Prof. Kyoung-Rai Kim, Analytical Chemistry
    • Prof. Kyoung-Tai Kim, Genetic Engineering
    • Prof. Young-Gil Kim, Materials Science
    • Prof. Young In Kim, Engineering
    • Dr. John W. Klotz, Biologist
    • Dr. Vladimir F. Kondalenko, Cytology/Cell Pathology
    • Dr. Leonid Korochkin, M.D., Genetics, Molecular Biology, Neurobiology
    • Dr. John K.G. Kramer, Biochemistry
    • Prof. Jin-Hyouk Kwon, Physics
    • Prof. Myung-Sang Kwon, Immunology
    • Dr. John Leslie, Biochemist
    • Prof. Lane P. Lester, Biologist, Genetics
    • Dr. Jason Lisle, Astrophysicist
    • Dr. Alan Love, Chemist
    • Dr. Ian Macreadie, molecular biologist and microbiologist:
    • Dr. John Marcus, Molecular Biologist
    • Dr. George Marshall, Eye Disease Researcher
    • Dr. Ralph Matthews, Radiation Chemist
    • Dr. John McEwan, Chemist
    • Prof. Andy McIntosh, Combustion theory, aerodynamics
    • Dr. David Menton, Anatomist
    • Dr. Angela Meyer, Creationist Plant Physiologist
    • Dr. John Meyer, Physiologist
    • Dr. Albert Mills, Animal Embryologist/Reproductive Physiologist
    • Colin W. Mitchell, Geography
    • Dr. John N. Moore, Science Educator
    • Dr. John W. Moreland, Mechanical engineer and Dentist
    • Dr. Arlton C. Murray, Paleontologist
    • Dr. John D. Morris, Geologist
    • Dr. Len Morris, Physiologist
    • Dr. Graeme Mortimer, Geologist
    • Stanley A. Mumma, Architectural Engineering
    • Prof. Hee-Choon No, Nuclear Engineering
    • Dr. Eric Norman, Biomedical researcher
    • Dr. David Oderberg, Philosopher
    • Prof. John Oller, Linguistics
    • Prof. Chris D. Osborne, Assistant Professor of Biology
    • Dr. John Osgood, Medical Practitioner
    • Dr. Charles Pallaghy, Botanist
    • Dr. Gary E. Parker, Biologist, Cognate in Geology (Paleontology)
    • Dr. David Pennington, Plastic Surgeon
    • Prof. Richard Porter
    • Dr. Georgia Purdom, Molecular Genetics
    • Dr. John Rankin, Cosmologist
    • Dr. A.S. Reece, M.D.
    • Prof. J. Rendle-Short, Pediatrics
    • Dr. Jung-Goo Roe, Biology
    • Dr. David Rosevear, Chemist
    • Dr. Ariel A. Roth, Biology
    • Dr. Jonathan D. Sarfati, Physical chemist / spectroscopist
    • Dr. Joachim Scheven Palaeontologist:
    • Dr. Ian Scott, Educator
    • Dr. Saami Shaibani, Forensic physicist
    • Dr. Young-Gi Shim, Chemistry
    • Prof. Hyun-Kil Shin, Food Science
    • Dr. Mikhail Shulgin, Physics
    • Dr. Emil Silvestru, Geologist/karstologist
    • Dr. Roger Simpson, Engineer
    • Dr. Harold Slusher, Geophysicist
    • Dr. E. Norbert Smith, Zoologist
    • Dr. Andrew Snelling, Geologist
    • Prof. Man-Suk Song, Computer Science
    • Dr. Timothy G. Standish, Biology
    • Prof. James Stark, Assistant Professor of Science Education
    • Prof. Brian Stone, Engineer
    • Dr. Esther Su, Biochemistry
    • Dr. Charles Taylor, Linguistics
    • Dr. Stephen Taylor, Electrical Engineering
    • Dr. Ker C. Thomson, Geophysics
    • Dr. Michael Todhunter, Forest Genetics
    • Dr. Lyudmila Tonkonog, Chemistry/Biochemistry
    • Dr. Royal Truman, Organic Chemist:
    • Dr. Larry Vardiman, Atmospheric Science
    • Prof. Walter Veith, Zoologist
    • Dr. Joachim Vetter, Biologist
    • Dr. Tas Walker, Mechanical Engineer and Geologist
    • Dr. Jeremy Walter, Mechanical Engineer
    • Dr. Keith Wanser, Physicist
    • Dr. Noel Weeks, Ancient Historian (also has B.Sc. in Zoology)
    • Dr. A.J. Monty White, Chemistry/Gas Kinetics
    • Dr. John Whitmore, Geologist/Paleontologist
    • Dr. Carl Wieland, Medical doctor
    • Dr. Lara Wieland, Medical doctor
    • Dr. Clifford Wilson, Psycholinguist and archaeologist
    • Dr. Kurt Wise, Palaeontologist
    • Dr. Bryant Wood, Creationist Archaeologist
    • Prof. Seoung-Hoon Yang, Physics
    • Dr. Thomas (Tong Y.) Yi, Ph.D., Creationist Aerospace & Mechanical Engineering
    • Dr. Ick-Dong Yoo, Genetics
    • Dr. Sung-Hee Yoon, Biology
    • Dr. Patrick Young, Chemist and Materials Scientist
    • Prof. Keun Bae Yu, Geography
    • Dr. Henry Zuill, Biology

42. 42 Dave Mar 21st, 2007 at 4:30 pm

    Chris,

    I’ve read through your list of “creation scientists,” and, as a result, I know no longer respect you as a person, either.

    The reason is quite simple: I recognized only one name on your list – Duane Gish.

    Now, as it happens, I actually read Gish’s crack-pot book, “Evolution – The Fossils say No!” way back in December of 1982 (yes, I keep records on what I read).

    Gish was one of the earliest examples I ran into of a creation “scientists” who should have been flunked out of frosh physics. He tried to argue in his book for creationism by mis-stating the second law of thermodynamics (the law of increasing entropy).

    This is one of the most common errors made by the creationist crack-pots, and, as much as legitimate scientists such as Greg and myself, try to point out to them their error, they are too stupid to learn.

    I know that words such as “stupid” and “crack-pot” offend your tender sensibilities. I’m sure that OJ dislikes being called a “murderer,” too.

    But OJ is a murderer, and “creation scientists” are con artists.

    It is indeed possible to get a Ph.D. in science (after all, anyone can set up a “university” and grant Ph.D.s!) and not actually know much science. Even at Stanford, I knew a handful of ignoramuses who slipped through the system and managed to get a Ph.D.

    Like so many scientists, I have tried over the years to carry on rational, serious discussions with creationists. I finally realized that it is simply a waste of time to try to teach science to people who are determined not to learn it – you can bring a horse to water…

    So, yes, I have over the decades lost my patience for wasting my time debating with creationists. I’m not a liberal – I have never fallen for the lie that all humans are equal: some of us are honest and intelligent and work hard to learn things. Creationists are not honest, intelligent, hard workers. “Creation scientists” are not equal to legitimate scientists, and no fake appeal to tolerance can change that fact.

    If you want to see what is wrong with creationism, forget about the nobodies on the list you posted and actually go to the trouble to learn the relevant science.

    If you choose not to learn science, well, it’s a free country. But do not expect me or any intelligent person to have any respect for you.

    Dave M. in Sacramento

43. 43 cmf Mar 21st, 2007 at 5:33 pm

    Why pick on OJ? He didn’t even state a view about creation, and the jury said his views on destruction might well have been accurately stated in his innocence;-)
    Have we lost faith in the jury process? After all, religions flatulent influence is growing, the popular vote( if that’s what it was)elected a fascist, and the jury is on trial too? Are we too afraid to do our own thinking or is it that democracy works, and this is how ” I pledge allegiance to GOD, and the United States of disinformation”

44. 44 Nance Confer Mar 21st, 2007 at 8:02 pm

    So, Chris, the answer to my question:

    “You know people who hold doctorates in biology, or a related field, who don’t think evolution is supported by the evidence? Who have some sort of evidence that creationism or ID are correct, supported in science?”

    is no, you don’t know anyone. You can go to the AIG website or the Ministries ‘R Us website and copy the list they have but you don’t really know any of these people.

    This is the sort of time-wasting nonsense that causes some of us to get pissy with folks who want to push the creation or ID line.

    If you want anyone to take you seriously, find one person you know in real life who holds a doctorate in biology and has evidence that creationism or ID are actually correct and evolution is actually not a valid theory and then get back to us. Otherwise, this sort of garbage is just garbage — a long list but a long list of garbage.

    Nance

45. 45 Chris Mar 21st, 2007 at 9:07 pm

    LOL. Y’all missed the point. And proved it. I never even said I am a creation science proponant. I never said what my belief system is.

    Yes, the list came from the AIG website. Anyone can find them. Some of them have links.

    My original point was that there are intelligent people on both sides of the debate. I never said I knew them personally; I said I know “of” people. I don’t know them either…google them or go to the AIG website to find out who they are. I don’t know any evolution scientists personally either. I don’t tend to run in science circles. Who I know or don’t know really only proves who I know or don’t know. Just because I don’t know Bill Clinton really doesn’t matter in an argument about politics.

    My point was that all sides suffer when people can’t engage in civil dialogue on any topic.

    Those who have responded have branded me, called me names (sniff) and pretty much decided they know all about me. ??? Because I said that I think both sides of one issue should be able to engage in civil communication.

    Should I never speak to an evolution scientist again because three people here were quick to jump to conclusions about me?

    I’m not a scientiest nor do I play one on TV :). I would never expect anyone to take me seriously on any topic of science! Yikes. I’m a communications major. I love the idea that words an build bridges; attitudes can build bridges. Basically I love the idea that bridges can be built. As long as one party views the other as time wasting idiots, I’m pretty sure the bridge will be wobbly, probably not even attempted. Just more sandbox sitting with two people pulling on the same old pail. Perhaps one stomping off in a huff.

    And maybe y’all are right. Maybe it’s best just to cling to whatever my belief happens to be and spit at all others. I just can’t make that work for me.

46. 46 Nance Confer Mar 21st, 2007 at 9:19 pm

    Where’s the dialogue, Chris?

    You post a list of “scientists” and contend that that proves that smart people can believe in hocum too.

    And? I should be civil and say what? “Nice degree there, fella.”

    No, that’s not a grownup’s response to blather.

    The grownup response, hope it doesn’t hurt your feelings and get another sniff, is to point out that the list is meaningless.

    Telling me I am rude to point that out and that if only I were tolerant of blather the world would be a better place. . . what’s the point of that? It doesn’t promote dialogue or understanding or anything else positive. It just endorses blather.

    Nance

47. 47 Chris Mar 21st, 2007 at 9:20 pm

    One more thing. “Stupid” and “crackpot” are fairly subjective terms. “Murderer” is not. The first two are based on one person’s feelings about another. The second is based on the actions of the person and is an objective true or false statement, whether the “murderer” in question likes it or not.

48. 48 Chris Mar 21st, 2007 at 10:01 pm

    I stated: I know OF people who have Ph’s and believe in creationism.

    Nance: Wanted to know of ONE.

    I posted the list.

49. 49 Chris Mar 21st, 2007 at 10:16 pm

    And Nance,

    I’m sorry I called you rude. My intention was only to point out what I perceive as unhelpful communication in one of many important dialogues in our culture. Or it should be. The dialogue can only begin with willing participants. This list was not an attempt at dialogue, but rather a direct answer to a direct question. I didn’t realize from the question that the answer was confined to scientists I personally know. I don’t know any for or against.

    Again, I would not presume to debate for or against evolution, intelligent design, creationism, or frankly many important topics in our culture. I just see this merry go round happen again and again and again. I can go to creationist/ID sites and I assume find the same sorts of attitudes should I suggest holding dialogue with evolutionists. Maybe the internet just is not a source of viable dialogue…it kind of leads to an “internet rage” sort of mentality.

    This whole topic began with home education. I am somewhat of an experiential, not cultural, expert there. And home schoolers tend to have the same sort of attitude about home schooling that is being expressed…tired of dealing with the neverending question of “what about socialization?” But when we fail to take that questioner seriously, or are offended, who benefits? No one. And really, what’s the benefit in being offended?

    Chris

50. 50 cmf Mar 22nd, 2007 at 1:24 am

    In science, the desired outcome is to rethink the opinion you previously held if and when new evidence is presented; compare, and contrast, factor in personal biases, and proceed to reform an opinion, or revert to one more logical, and factual.The medicine that kids take to prevent disease is the result of evolution, the house that is above your head is built of scientific formulas, and the car you drive? It is definitely, provably, a contributor to global warming.

    In the ID movement, or with the religious, and others who start with ‘the answer’, and point to one source, which is never seen, heard, or tested ; they proceed to find evidence for it9 the unseen and unprovable, non factual) being the only answer,or a set of them that came from anywhere but the simple scientific reality of observability. Rethinking biases, factoring in new evidence, and rigorous dedication to the one idea that ‘in fact you might well be wrong’–based in facts, not ideologies, or superstitions–is the morm, and often with many at the truly ideological, non fact based people–with their extremes of opinion– there is no other option than to feel offended, and to reaffirm the pre-existing biases one holds, and then to reaffirm whatever self involved principle of pride is calling for justice to the hurt ego ( super ego or ID, in the case of some of them)and proceed to label the person leveling criticism, or offering a differing opinion , as a jerk, no evidence necessary.

    Sure, science is full of jerks too, people who can barely put their socks on right, hold a conversation, or clearly elaborate the theories they have–but they are often full of useful, fact and theory based knowledge, which more often than not leads to scientific break throughs.
    In social psychology for example, there is such a thing as labeling theory. For instance, a guy feels like he has been called a jerk. He then either acepts, or rejects the definition–within himself–and acts or reacts as a jerk, or a non jerk. Then, if this label gets repeated, and or he/she becomes “stigmatized”, he internalizes the definition, or someone else external to him does it for him in the act of “labeling” him a jerk. At that point, he is publicly known as a jerk( the most likely immediate scenario) or, he does as you seem tpo be doing, and he tries to further elaborate on his own theory of self, often in defiance of, or as a reaction to, the label.
    In evolution,( “Greg help me” here if I am mis stating it…) with physical traits and attributes( say aggression in female lions, which leads to the predation upon and death of other creatures)we call that the process of natural selection–traits that adapt themselves to survival in life and the passing on of those traits genetically–or in the case of a label, intellectual life, and genetic predisposition to tender ego, easily stained, or discouraged in the form of discussion–but I notice that you are in fact not YET fully expresing an opinion, which is good, and though your earlier posts hinted ( no …um…smacked of…) religious basis, you are still here right?
    Being offended has guided more than one soul to the truth of science, over the other choice of willfull, often immature self righteous opinion, or turdy little acts of two year old like no participatory abstinence from enlightening stuff, like good conversation…

51. 51 Nance Confer Mar 22nd, 2007 at 1:54 pm

    This whole topic began with home education. I am somewhat of an experiential, not cultural, expert there. And home schoolers tend to have the same sort of attitude about home schooling that is being expressed…tired of dealing with the neverending question of “what about socialization?” But when we fail to take that questioner seriously, or are offended, who benefits? No one. And really, what’s the benefit in being offended?

    Chris
    *********
    What’s the benefit in giving the “socialization” question validity?

    Everyone stop what you are productively doing with your day and reassure the guy who didn’t bother to do any research that your kids are not actually locked in the closet all day.

    Is that what you have in mind?

    Why is there no obligation on the part of the questioner? The “concerned” stranger?

    Why is my choice open for insulting questions? A choice I am not trying to push onto anyone, btw. Unlike some religious types who want to push religion into science and borrow some legitimacy.

    FWIW, I help parents interested in hsing all the time. But none of them start of by attacking me and my choices. And if they did, I wouldn’t be inclined to help them. And if they ask me a question and I give them some information, I expect them to read it and consider it before asking me the same thing again. I expect them to take responsibility for their own learning and their own research. Is that too much to expect of the “concerned” “expert?”

    Nance

52. 52 Dave Mar 22nd, 2007 at 4:50 pm

    Chris,

    You wrote:

    >One more thing. “Stupid” and “crackpot” are fairly subjective terms. “Murderer” is not. The first two are based on one person’s feelings about another. The second is based on the actions of the person and is an objective true or false statement, whether the “murderer” in question likes it or not.

    I guess you were not in the US back in the ’90s! If you had been, you would have known that there was quite a lot of “subjective” disagreement about whether or not OJ committed murder. Twelve members of a jury who heard all the evidence thought he did not. Most Americans (at least most Caucasians) thought he did.

    And if you learn anything about the law, you will find that the legal definition of “murder” (even of “homicide”) is quite complex and even subjective.

    No, “murder” is not a more objective term than “stupid” or “crack-pot.”

    If you think that “crack-pot,” when applied to the IDers, is a subjective term, you really do need to learn some science!

    All your Oprahish talk about dialogue sounds very sweet, but it is really very destructive. The reason Hitler killed the Jews (or Stalin killed the kulaks or…) was not that they failed to dialogue with him. Liars, con artists, and thugs need to be publicly exposed and ridiculed, not coddled.

    Honest scientists do not want dialogue with lying con artists such as the Intelligent Designers. Any honest scientists simply want those lying con artists to be publicly exposed as the frauds that they are.

    I hate to tell you this – some people are not honest. The IDers are clear examples.

    Freedom of speech means that we have to tolerate their lying. It also means that we have a right to expose them as liars.

    Dave

53. 53 Chris Mar 22nd, 2007 at 5:06 pm

    Cmf - You’re right about the whole offensive style of communication (attitude being offensive, not information) being an avenue to change. Maybe it’s just wishful thinking that information could be exchanged without attitude. I LIKE visiting different websites (usually not science - more home education, religion and politics) and being challenged in my views. I actually dislike visiting those with the same opinion as mine, because I dislike the attitudes, and don’t really glean much information. I’d do it more if I didn’t have to wade through the name calling. And I respectfully disagree that every creation scientist in the world is a jerk; while I cannot currently prove that statement, just the laws of logical would find it to be true. Not to mention the term jerk would need to be defined.

    Just for clarification, I had a really hard time following what you are saying. I do have an opinion…about most things in life to be honest. I would no more try to argue science with a scientest than…well…anything! I got an A in Freshman chemistry without retaining a thing and happily resigned from the science world. I don’t argue politics, but I have an opinion. I just am not well informed on the topic. I don’t argue or really even have an opinion on global warming as I have never researched it. I would tend to think there is some validity, but again just don’t know. I have an opinion on Darfur. I have about six opinions on the war in Iraq, but again have little firsthand information. Again, one of my biggest frustrations is the need to wade through attitudes and emotions to get to information.

    Nance - I wonder if perhaps both of us are reponding to people in our minds who ask about socialization. I’m responding mostly to the lady in the grocery store or whose kids are on the same soccer team as mine who just asks the question. She has no interest in home schooling and no real interest that I’m doing it either…we’re just making conversation. I don’t need to be offended, convince her or anything else…just briefly represent home schooling in a positive light. I could tell her to mind her own business, but I’m not sure why I would. If there’s a guy on a website asking questions about home schooling I would ignore him or answer him with information or but probably not have a need to ridicule him.

    Now if there were a “concerned stranger” who obviously felt that I was abusing my children by home educating them and was hostile towards me, I would not feel the need to respond. Neither would I feel the need to spit in their face, unless of course they were messing with my kids. That would trigger the fight response.

    And thus ends my participation in this dialogue…I wave my white flag and retreat…gotta get back to the full time job and the full time kids and the company coming…etc…

    Chris

54. 54 Dave Mar 22nd, 2007 at 5:39 pm

    Nance,

    You wrote:
    > What’s the benefit in giving the “socialization” question validity?
    >Everyone stop what you are productively doing with your day and reassure the guy who didn’t bother to do any research that your kids are not actually locked in the closet all day.
    >Is that what you have in mind?

    You’ve touched on one of my pet peeves about my fellow homeschoolers (myself included).

    The honest response to the socialization question should be:

    “Most American kids are way over-socialized. They spend far too much time trying to be clones of their peers and far too little time developing their own individual mind and personal character. I want the opposite for my own kids and that’s why I’m going to all the trouble of homeschooling.”

    But of course when someone hits me with the socialization question, I don’t respond that way and instead start mumbling about how my kids meet other kids at dance class, etc.

    We’ve all been Oprahified. We’re all listening too much to people like Chris.

    In a way, Greg was right about homeschooling being ideologically based – but it goes beyond liberal vs. conservative or creationist vs. evolutionist (which seems to be what Greg originally had in mind). The ideological divide is about what sort of person a human should aspire to be. Should one be a “well-adjusted” person who “fits in” with the crowd because he tries frantically to be just like everyone else? Or should one be a person who is unafraid of offending others by holding to moral and intellectual standards that were formed independent of peer pressure?

    Dave

55. 55 Chris Mar 22nd, 2007 at 8:01 pm

    Dave! That’s it! You have helped me define why it is better for me not to angry/hostile/snitty/negative or whatever in my debates/dialogues/interactions etc… Because I can think more clearly and then have an intelligent response when people ask me about socialization. I used to do the mumble, mumble, excuse thing too and hated it. Now I can give a clear explanation of why I am not concerned about socialization, why I think it’s harmful etc…What you said. It is easier for me to access that information when I’m calm. It is easier for me to be unafraid of offending others when it is only my information that stands to offend and not my attitude.

    I know I said was leaving…just had to do that last check thing!

    And I have to chuckle about the me and Oprah thing. I mean, I guess we both have weight problems but I’m pretty sure that’s where the similarities end.

56. 56 Nance Confer Mar 22nd, 2007 at 9:19 pm

    Well, that’s one right answer, Dave. And you are welcome to use it. I even agree with you. But that’s not the only right answer.

    Many times, Chris (even though I know you have said you are just way too busy to continue here maybe you’ll see this response) the old socialization saws that “concerned” questioners (not the nice old lady at the supermarket who is usually happy to see my happy children but through years of training asks if school is out. . .) trot out involve my children being isolated (and likely abused, tut tut, we are “concerned” about the children, doncha know).

    The right answer I will give, if I’m in the mood, is that that is a rude, accusatory and uninformed question. Acting surprised that any parent could possibly be offended by such a question does not make the question any less rude.

    Nance

57. 57 Chris Mar 22nd, 2007 at 10:10 pm

    Nance - I’m curious, why did you respond to Greg at all then? Why did you take the time to come to this site, read his blog and respond in the first place if it’s just wasting time, and you don’t care what he thinks? I’m having trouble not making this sound sarcastic, but it’s really not. I don’t get it. And what’s the benefit in telling someone off as opposed to just walking away? Why do you choose to communicate in the style that you do?

    And I guess I’m not too busy…although I probably should be.

58. 58 Dave Mar 22nd, 2007 at 10:23 pm

    Nance,

    Actually, I very rarely get the “socialization question” from outright strangers. Sometimes, I see it in public forums similar to Greg’s (but then I cannot reasonably object that it is rude, since it is not directed to me personally). Sometimes, it does come from complete strangers, but only after I have made clear a willingness to discuss homeschooling in detail so that they could reasonably think that I am open to the question.

    The biggest problem with it being raised as an unwelcome issue for me has been from family members, who, I suppose, feel a right to be more intrusive than strangers. In some of these family interactions, yeah, you’re probably right to characterize it as “a rude, accusatory and uninformed question.” I’m not sure, though, that I have the guts to quite say as much to family members. Have you found yourself able to?

    And, in their defense, Americans have been so indoctrinated with the importance of “socialization” that I think that they really, sincerely do have trouble understanding how a child could have a decent life without spending thirty hours a week with a group of his peers.

    By the way, my experience with strangers discussing our homeschooling has been overwhelmingly positive. Perhaps this is just due to people’s being polite, or perhaps to an awareness of the very severe problems in the public schools.

    Dave

59. 59 Dave Mar 22nd, 2007 at 10:33 pm

    Chris,

    I wish I could claim that I am such a genius that I came up with that response on my own, but of course statements along that line have been floating around among homeschoolers for quite a while (although, the word “socialization” always has sort of given me the creeps: reminds me of the Borg — “you will be assimilated…”).

    Of course, what we are seeing in this discussion is that we homeschoolers are not a monolithic group at all, contrary to what Greg seemed initially to assume. You and I agree about homeschooling, disagree about creationism, and could no doubt find numerous other areas of both agreement and disagreement.

    One of the reasons I am less worried than Greg is about creationists who are homeschooling, even though I am just as critical of creationism as he is, is that I think the homeschooling process tends, by the inherent logic of the situation, to cause homeschooled kids to lose faith in authority. It might start out with you (hypothetically) telling your kids not to trust authorities such as Dr. Laden or Richard Dawkins on evolution, but, sooner or later, the kid is likely to make the obvious logical leap to the idea that maybe they should not just trust you either.

    Once the idea of trusting authority breaks down, no telling what will happen! Freedom is a very dangerous idea indeed.

    Dave

60. 60 don Mar 22nd, 2007 at 11:54 pm

    I wrote quite a lengthy post about this at my blog: www.thegookins.net.

    I hope you get a chance to pop over and read it.

61. 61 COD Mar 23rd, 2007 at 11:19 am

    Really, the only people that ever bring up the socialization myth are professional educators and bloggers without kids. I don’t think I’ve ever had a parent tell me my kids were missing something beneficial by not dealing with the junior high lunchroom every day!

    Good point on the authority issue Dave. Also, the point I keep trying to make is that whether or not you believe in God, Noah’s Ark, Allah, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or nothing is not particularly important. Religion, or lack thereof, simply is not a good indicator of how well you will do in life. Plenty of successful people are Christian, plenty of Atheists are successful too. The only place it matters is when one group tries to use the government to force it’s beliefs on the rest of us.

    And both sides are equally guilty in that regard.

62. 62 cmf Mar 23rd, 2007 at 4:01 pm

    Hey Dave, great point about authority. It is my main contention that many homescholers indeed have one main agenda, which is to conceal from their children other sources of information–sources that can only be tapped into by the process of socialization,i.e. ‘other opinions’ outside the pale of the parents limited world view, and especially, the parents CONTROL–but I agree that “by the inherent logic of the situation, to cause homeschooled kids to lose faith in authority. It might start out with you (hypothetically) telling your kids not to trust authorities such as Dr. Laden or Richard Dawkins on evolution, but, sooner or later, the kid is likely to make the obvious logical leap to the idea that maybe they should not just trust you either.”
    Of course, when some homeschooled kids ( the majority, in my personal experience) wake up and crawl out from under that overly sheltered cloud of parental authority, which unfortunately more oftebn than not, presents itself as THE authority to be trusted, they too, like regular kids, experience the facts of life , and all of its conflicting views.
    One benefit of sociaslization is that it is a process of “currency” i.e. it is s/th that occurs in real time, in the real world, which is a changing world, and a world of the future, not the past. This simply means that the social process outside the house and the control of the parent is a process that the child will emerge into as an adult, and that new adult will have to make choices that don’t include the parents clouistered viewpoints, on a real time basis–at which point it is likely, and often trhe case that they feel lied to, and sense they have been manipulated.
    COD: I don’t know which non-parents you are talking about here on this board: the commenters here are largely parents,

63. 63 cmf Mar 23rd, 2007 at 4:41 pm

    It really is a quagmire when people who may or may not be ideologically driven are mixed into the general thought pool with open minds–kind of like pee in the pool.It’s one thing to cloister your kids as a reaction to the outside(the home) world, and quite another thing to pump them full of propaganda, in the disguise of education, in which case the argument against low quality public edu. doing the same is flawed.
    The entire current movement to homeschool was born out of the hippie commune models of the last century, and they were quite a bag of trix.There was the group with a shared focus on the environment, others with a focus on subsistence farming, and all of that other good hippie stuff; but there was also, and still exists, that thread of gay/lesbian/religious/antisocial/feminist/etc…all of them have a distinct agenda to propagandize kids, i.e. to use kids as a tool for agenda.
    So when an earlier poster notes that homeschooling is a choice that they are “Not trying to push… on anyone” I would think, yeah, except for that KIDS ARE SOMEONE TOO;-) and it is them who are likely thus covertly propagandized

64. 64 Dave Mar 23rd, 2007 at 5:18 pm

    Greg,

    After the fun we’ve all had arguing about creationism and the IDers, I thought I should try to get back to your original questions.

    Stephanie, in her response on her “one-sixteenth” blog, covered many of the topics that apply to my family also, so I will focus on points where I feel a need to add to her comments.

    On the general testing and oversight issue, our kids are tested regularly: they have taken a standardized test three times so far this year under the supervision of a public-school teacher and have done very well (my second-grader scored grade 9.9 on reading on the latest test). Next month, they will be taking the standard California STAR test – I will not be in the room and it will be proctored by public-school teachers.

    I do not object to the testing: I actually think it is good experience, since eventually the kids will have to take the SAT, the driving test, etc. However, I _would_ object if the tests were mandatory. (In California, even traditional public-school students have a legal right to refuse to take the tests if their families so choose.)

    The legal right to opt out of the test is, in my view, a “safety valve.” If the testing procedure somehow becomes abusive, if the tests become an excuse to control how we educate our kids, or if the tests simply become goofy (i.e., if creationists were to take over the state educational establishment and impose their views on the tests!), I know I can always simply opt out.

    As to our daily procedure, I like to think we do the equivalent of “zero-based budgeting.” Each day, my focus (I am the stay-at-home homeschooling parent) is what can we learn on this particular day.

    Of course, I have long-term goals in my mind that are fairly obvious: arithmetic, then algebra and geometry, etc. in math, for example. And, according to the standardized tests, our kids are far, far beyond grade level in the standard academic areas.

    But I try to make my focus always on the output, the results, never on the procedure or on the inputs.

    I’m sure your wife is a fine biology teacher. But, if two months into the year, she concludes that the BSCS Blue Book just is not working for a couple of the students in her class, I doubt that she can chuck the book, just for those two students, and immediately switch them to the Campbell-Reece text. We can, and do, do exactly that.

    My other core guiding principle is to do everything I can to see that my kids are profoundly alienated from American society.

    I chose the word “alienated” carefully. I don’t mean “angry.”

    I assume that in your department you have some of the old-fashioned social/cultural anthropologists who do the participant-observation thing, studying other societies by living among them. I want my kids to acquire the same sort of attitude towards the United States.

    Of course, inevitable, my kids will “really” be Americans. But there are several ways I think I can encourage a bit of intellectual and emotional “distancing.”

    First, merely the fact that they are homeschooled dramatically reduces “peer pressure.” They see other kids in various venues, but it is not as continuous and overwhelming as it is for public-schooled kids.

    Second, I try to encourage a broader temporal and geographical perspective. My wife is the daughter of Chinese immigrants and the kids are learning Mandarin. They are also learning ancient Greek. (And, of course, I am frantically trying to keep up with them in both languages.)

    When we do history, we talk about how George Washington started the Seven Years War by brutally ambushing a French diplomatic mission. (Apparently, George was bitter for years that the French later captured him and induced him to sign a confession admitting that he had murdered the French nobleman who headed that mission: it was actually one of Washington’s Native American allies who carried out the murder.) We talk about how the Supreme Court ruled that Lincoln illegally violated habeas corpus as President and how Lincoln went to court to force an escaped slave family back into bondage a few years before he was elected President.

    Of course, we also talk about admirable figures and events in American history, but I want them to view the USA as just one more country among many, not as God’s chosen land. Conservative outcries to the contrary, my observation is that most public-school graduates have a rather rosy view of the USA and its history.

    Finally, and most importantly, I’ve treated science, from kindergarten on, not simply as a means to make useful gadgets but as the primary source of information about the real world. My niece is a freshman in one of the top-rated public-school districts out here in California, and, so far, the schools still seem not to have let her on in the secret that we are descended from monkeys. (Yes, I know that, properly speaking, we and monkeys share a common ancestor. But, at one stage, that common ancestor looked like a monkey. And, cladistically speaking, we are in the monkey clade.)

    I want my kids to “internalize” evolution, the Big Bang, etc. in the same way that the fundamentalists’ children internalize the Holy Ghost, Original Sin, and all the rest. If you first learn of evolution in high school (or college!), it’s hard to really fully absorb it as a central aspect of your view of the universe. That’s why the fundies want to get ‘em young: as the twig is bent…

    Of course, there is one big difference: the other day, I was discussing the origin of the moon with the kids, and, after I explained the currently-accepted collision theory, my seven-year-old innocently but skeptically turned towards me and asked, “Daddy, what’s the evidence for that?” I’m doing what I can to nurture that attitude.

    And, if I succeed, that is sure to profoundly alienate my kids from American society. After all, the fundamental split on the creationist/evolutionist issue is not really between those who “believe” in creation vs. those who “believe” in evolution. The real split is between those who “believe” in believing and those of us who think that one should not just believe but should be guided by evidence.

    No doubt your wife aspires to goals with her own students that in some ways overlap with my own goals. But I am quite certain that many of her colleagues do not. Nor do I know of any private school that has anything like these goals. So, if I want my kids’ schooling to have a single-minded focus on learning rather than on following some bureaucratically mandated procedures (do this workbook, finish that textbook, etc.) and if I want my kids to acquire a scientific and historically-informed world-view that is dramatically at odds with the view of the world held by most Americans, I see no real alternative to homeschooling.

    Hope this helps answer some of your questions.

    Dave

65. 65 Valerie Mar 24th, 2007 at 12:17 pm

    I’m a day late and a dollar short in catchng this discussion, but I gotta play, too.

    At my _sorely neglected_ personal blog, I started a category, “Our homeschooling a decade ago.” I hoped to have scans from the kids’ work, and diary entries from the notebooks that passed for our log books. I’m on a military homeschooling list, and I like to have examples to point people to. It seems easier to ‘do it once’ and have a link, than to write the same thing over, and over, and over …

    Because of ‘going to work’ at blogging, I haven’t kept up (but I mean to … it’s just finding more hours in my days, and energy to go along with the extra hours). Still, I have a few posts up: http://happy_as_kings.typepad......index.html

    I hope it helps you, Greg, in ’seeing’ what homeschooling looks like.

66. 66 Tammy Takahashi Mar 24th, 2007 at 6:11 pm

    Greg,

    I wanted to mention a couple of sites that offer perspectives on what homeschooling looks like in its many forms.

    lifewithoutschool.typepad.com
    and
    homeschooling.gomilpitas.com

    Hope that helps your search for answers.

67. 67 Chris Mar 25th, 2007 at 12:15 am

    Dave,

    Awesome post and articulation of what homeschooling means to many people. Christian or not, it summarizes so accurately what I want for my kids and myself. Thanks for taking the time to post this answer.

    I think I understand what you were saying about authority and heartily agree. I’ve seen the whole blind obedience thing in action and it has not been successful. I want my kids to seek answers to every question they have and have no problem encouraging them to explore any side of an issue they wish to. I never learned to learn, whether that was the school’s fault or my own; I want my kids to WANT to learn. I don’t know that I’m very good at it and am quite challenged by your 7 year old’s question.

    Freedom is a wild and dangerous responsibility. I started my parenting ride with lots of answers and lists of rules about what I would do and what my kids would do. I have not changed my core beliefs, but I have changed about everything else and any list of rules went by the wayside quickly.

    I wish you all the best, Dave, on this home schooling adventure. Your kids are fortunate to have a Dad so committed and involved.

    And Greg, the school systems are fortunate to have someone working to improve them and someone like your wife caring about kids learning.

68. 68 Malcolm Kirkpatrick Mar 31st, 2007 at 3:06 am

    Aloha, Everyone,

    The Alliance blog mentioned this site. I read a few posts about homeschooling and left a rebuttal to Mr. Laden’s “Size Matters” post, but it hasn’t appeared. Curious…

    I am not a parent. I was a teacher in one of the worst government school systems in the US, the Hawaii DOE. Currently I tutor. None of my current students is a homeschooler, but a former student of mine, whom I tutored from 3rd to 6th grade, whom his parents then homeschooled after 7th grade, started work on his MA (Math) in January of 2006. He turned 18 31-Jan.-2007.

    Jane Austen, John Stuart Mill, Bertrand Russsell and Yehudi Menuhin were homeschooled. Srinivasa Ramanujan was self-taught, as were the guitarist Yngwe Malmstein and the singers Joss Stone and Billie Holiday. Jewel Kilcher was homeschooled.

    Just as the “size matters” argument fails (as presented by defenders of the NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel’s exclusive position in receipt of the taxpayers’ K-12 education subsidy), so also does the “fairness” argument fail (even when presented by homeschool defenders like Chris, in this thread). Across the US, the correlation (percent 20K dist, $/pupil), where “percent 20K dist” is the fraction of total State enrollment in districts over 20,000 and $/pupil is per pupil revenues to the district, is positive in all but three or four States with five or more districts over 20,000. Large districts get more money per pupil. The correlation (percent 20K dist, delta score), where ” delta score” is the difference between the White mean and the Black mean NAEP 4th or 8th grade Reading or Math core, is positive. Aggregation exacerbates inequality. Smaller is better. Across the US, the correlation (percent minority enrollment, $/pupil) is positive in every single State with five or more districts over 20,000 enrollment. The myth of the under-funded, inner-city minority school district is a lie. Large, urban, minority school districts get more money per pupil than suburbal or rural White districts. Dilatidated buildings and obsolete textbooks are not due to insufficient taxpayer generosity; the bureaucrats steal taxpayers’ money and poor kids’ life chances. Political control of school harms most the children of the least politically adept parents (”Well, duh!”, as my students would say).

    Denis Rader, Jose Padilla, Timothy McVeigh, Ted Bundy, and Ted Kaczynski attended government (i.e., “public”) schools.

    In Hawaii, juvenile arrests for assault, drug possession, and drug promotion fall in summer, when school is not in session. Juvenile hospitalizations for human-induced trauma fall in summer. School is bad socialization. Schools don’t prevent crime; they cause it.

69. 69 Greg Mar 31st, 2007 at 9:27 am

    Malcolm. … I promise you that I have not EVER deleted a post someone has left on this site. I reserve the right to do so, but it has not happened.

    One other person has had difficulty posting. . Maybe you did what she did …. you coied and pasted into the box. That sometimes gives problems.

    As far as district size, please reconsider your analysis. I have not in any way suggested larger schools. Bad idea. No larger schools.

    I’m talking about eliminating redundant bureaucracy.

70. 70 Malcolm Kirkpatrick Apr 1st, 2007 at 12:56 am

    I wasn’t looking at school size, but at district size. Scores fall and, beyond a rather low level, per pupil costs rise as districts increase in size. That’s an empirical fact. Go to the Digest of Education Statistics. Download the tables on district funding and enrollment (”Selected statistics on school districts over 20,000 enrollment” or “…15,000 enrollment” depending on the year of the __Digest..__ you use) The correlation between enrollment and cost per pupil is positive in all but three or four US States with five or more districts over 20,000 (or 15,000…). Per pupil costs rise as districts increase in size. Across the US, the correlation between mean State school district size and State per pupil cost is positive. Per pupil costs rise as districts increase in size.

    NAEP 4th and 8th grade scores fall as districts increase in size, with one interesting exception: the mean score of children of College-educated White parents rises as districts increase in size (very low positive correlation, while overall the correlation (percent enrolled in large districtrs, score) is around -0.45.

71. 71 sqeekyskweel Apr 1st, 2007 at 4:32 am

    I can see the headlines: Greg ladens Blog heats up; researchers suspect difference in female body temperature due to aging…
    >> You sure are getting the press these days;-)And I for one can attest” GREG LADEN DOES NOT CENSOR HIS POSTS>>>EVER.
    The fewer links you include, the better, but also s/times the html from a bad link will prevent a post.

72. 72 Greg Apr 1st, 2007 at 10:52 am

    Malcolm, I’m going to look into all of that but you’ll have to forgive me if I look at it quite independantly and draw my own conclusions. I would not be surprised if turning the tuning-dial on any one variable gets crappy results in an entrenched governmental system, because there are parasites all ready for that to happen.

    However, one thing that makes me not assume right away that you are correct, in all due respect, is that it is unlikely that there is a one-way relationship for all variables. In other words, what is the optimal size district or school? From what you are saying, it sounds like it might be a district or school that has one single student.

    I’m not sure if any region has the number of school districts Minnesota has a population of 5 million. About half are in just a few school districts. this means that the population for the average district in Minnesota after removing the top 3 or 4, is probably about 7,000 people. I simply do not believe that turnig dozens of 7K school disticts in to, say, half that many 14K school districts is going to matter in any way whatsoever except not having to pay a super. I’m not sure to what level one can do this before you stop gaining and start losing, but it is NOT as zero consolidations!

    Also, I can think of some very obvious reasons why there would be a correlation between per pupil cost and school district size that have nothing whatsoever to do with this conversation. Urban pupils are more expensive, for instance. Urban areas have larger districts (in number of students). If the data are national, regions with larger districts have higher costs per pupil for reasons unrelated to the district.

    Before I base anything on these numbers, I want to really see what is going on.

73. 73 Malcolm Kirkpatrick Apr 1st, 2007 at 1:52 pm

    DON’T BELIEVE ME! CHECK FOR YOURSELF!

    NCES does not make available to unaffiliated researchers NAEP scores for individual students, schools, or school districts (except for Hawaii and DC, which are unitary school districts). As a substitute for direct measurement of the relation between district size and NAEP Reading or Math scores, I use (a) the fraction of total State enrollment assigned to districts over 20,000 (or 15,000, depending on which year of the __Digest…__ you use), (b) The fraction of total State enrollment assigned to one or another of the nation’s top 130 largest districts, or (c) mean district size. For “score” I have used NAEP 4th and 8th grade Reading scores, 4th and 8th grade Math (composite) percentile scores, 4th and 8th grade Math (composite) proficiency scores, 4th and 8th grade Math (composite) mean scores, 4th and 8th grade Math (composite) mean scores by parent’s race and level of education, 4th and 8th grade Math (Nmbers and operations subtest) percentile scores, 4th and 8th grade Math (Numbers and Operations subtest) proficiency cores, 4th an 8th grade Math (Numbers and Operations subtest) mean scores, 4th and 8th grade Math (Numbers and Operations subtest) mean scores by parents’ race and level of education, 4th and 8th grade Math (Algebra ad Functions subtest)…etc. I have used NAEP results from 1990, 1992, 1994 (Reading only), 1996, and 2000. Although I have not used every one of these scores in every year, the results are almost always the same (the exceptions are instructive). Scores fall as districts increase in size.

    Another interesting statistic in support of homeschooling and the generalization that political control of school harms most the children of the least politically adept parents: the correlation between “age-start” and “score” is positive, where “age-start” is the age at which States compel attendance at school (take the age of compulsory attendance ten years or so before the test year). Later is better.

    “With all due respect”, the results are as I say (I AM “correct”), and I do not assert that the relation I observe has to maintain over ranges beyond those for which NCES provides data, or for more finely dis-aggregated populations. That is, taking children away from demonstrably incompetent parents at an earlier age may improve overall system performance.

    Peering through the fog of aggregate statistics, I deduce with fairly high confidence that 7,000 students is already too big.

    As to your final comment: There is no measure of the “cost” of students other than what districts spend. “What resources must we expend to bring these (category of) students to (some specified) performance level X?” is an empirical question which only an experiment can answer. Numerous small districts or a (voucher-subsidized) competitive market will provide more information than a few large districts will provide. A State-wide monopoly system (Hawaii, DC) is like an experiment with one treatment and no control: a retarded experimental design. The Harvard economist Caroline Hoxby has considered the “urban districts just are more expensive” hypothesis. She compared the cost and performance of large urban districts (which unified independent school districts as the towns which maintained the small districts merged into cities) to the aggregate performance of similarly urban districts which had maintained their independence. Smaller is better –and– cheaper.

    Without limit? Probably not, but the vertex of the plot of dollars per NAEP Math score point (vertical) to district enrollment (horozontal) is probably below 2000. But that’s a guess.

74. 74 Greg Apr 1st, 2007 at 2:15 pm

    Malcom, this discussion is becoming something of a moving target. Here’s how I figure it:

    My original proposal (not on this post, we seem to have moved) was to reduce the absurdly large number of school districts in MN from near 400 to much less. In the absence of any other change, you get to fire a lot of highly paid administrators, and probably save a big pile of money. Nothing else in this model changes.

    Your retort was that it costs more per child to run a school when the school (then, district) is larger.

    My response to that is that I doubt very much that this applies when you have a case similar to what you have in MN. I hold by that and I don’t see any data to suggest otherwise.

    Your other arguments are about school quality, etc. in relation to district and school size, and so on. I am not disputing that the public school system is broken. I am disputing that if the public school system is broken that it is not fixable.

    If my car is broken, I don’t switch to riding a bike, I fix the car.

    Here we probably have a fundamental difference in philosophy. I do not see how society works without having a school system. It is unrealistic fantasy to believe that everyone can just decide to home school their kids. For some (not necessarily you) is wishful thinking from some kind of family values perspective where we put women back into the home and add to their chores the education of the children. For others it may be just not noticing that there simply is not enough time and resource for every single parent or one of two parents, depending on the family situation, to leave their jobs, and it may also be mentioned that putting everyone in home schooling requires many individuals to simply not have the option of a productive, career oriented life. I don’t buy any of this, obviously.

    I’m not going to argue with you about whether or not the school system is broken. Duh. Of course it is. I’m not going assume your analysis is correct because I have problems with some of the information you’ve given, but having said that, I think it is likely that some of the issues you point out and some of the data is important and is telling us something alarming. But I also know how these things work, how selective data mining works, how non contextualized interpretation works, and I know at least 12 people read this blog and I’m not going to endorse or reject any particular set of data or analytical conclusions without looking myself carefully at it.

    I do appreciate all of the information you’ve supplied, and I think it is very interesting. At some point I hope to explore it more carefully!

75. 75 Malcolm Kirkpatrick Apr 1st, 2007 at 2:20 pm

    Sorry for the post-script…

    Greg Laden wrote: “what is the optimal size district or school? From what you are saying, it sounds like it might be a district or school that has one single student.”

    My answer is: “the optimal size of a school district depends on what powers a State’s laws give to districts.” If State law mandates that all districts must subsidize escape options (school vouchers, subsidized momeschooling) at some significant fraction (say, 2/3) of the regular-ed per pupil budget, there is nothing wrong with enormous districts. If a State’s laws give to parents no other way to escape bad policy than to move to another district or to bear all costs of education themselves (unsubsidized independent school, unsubsidized homeschooling), then small districts are better. Under 1000 students, I expect.

    I have read some school size research. It’s not my focus, and I’d rather leave comment on that to people who have studied the matter.

    Google-search “Marvin Minsky comment on schooling”.

76. 76 Greg Apr 1st, 2007 at 6:28 pm

    So, Malcolm, the optimal size school district is whichever one meets your political requirements!

77. 77 Malcolm Kirkpatrick Apr 2nd, 2007 at 5:44 pm

    So, Greg, you prefer to discuss the motives of people who dispute your hypothesis concerning the relation between district size and performance than to discuss the issue. I can supply statistics on the relation between district size and per-pupil costs, NAEP test scores, test points per dollar, or juvenile crime rates. Then again, I wil happily discuss the incentive structure built into the tax-subsidized post-secondary education sector which leads State university faculty to impugn the motives of people who advocate for a competitive market in education services. If you wish.

    Back to our topic: Professor Laden characterized the US K-12 education system as “broken”, and I agree to a considerable extent. I suggest that “broken” is a matter of degree and differences between various US State K-12 structures (e.g., district size, age of compulsory attenndance, teacher credential requirements, etc.) relate to differences in overall K-12 system performance, as measured by test scores, per-unit costs, juvenile (and adult) crime rates, and juvenile hospitalization rates. Against the district consolidation policy recommended by Greg Laden, I observe that the US State with the smallest mean district size, North Dakota, is the only US State whose TIMSS performance places it on a par with Singapore, the world’s top-performing country.

78. 78 Greg Apr 2nd, 2007 at 5:55 pm

    Malcolm, you must admit you left yourself open for that jab …

    But consider this: I reject your statistics in advance on the basis of logic.

    Imagine two school districts that are very small, each with two elementary schools, two middle schools, and one high schools. Each district has a district office with a super and a staff.

    Now, hold everything else the same, but close one of the district offices. Allow the remaining office to add a staff member or two, but that’s it. Take the money you gained from getting rid of one super and a staff member or two and hire a couple of teachers where most needed in the schools.

    How exactly is that going to raise juvenile crime rates? How is that going to affect test scores?

    Generally, I think you are playing around with the numbers. I don’t think you can compare the situation in the Dakotas with most other states. Your model of the status quo, picking and choosing among various statistics, makes a poor dynamic or predictive model.

79. 79 NA Littlefoot Apr 2nd, 2007 at 6:56 pm

    North Dakota; does that include Indian Reservations in the districts?
    “Conditions on Native reservations remain very poor at the moment, and rival some of the worst and most impoverished inner-city conditions in the US. Education, health, housing conditions, crime, and a wide variety of indicators show that reservations are much more impoverished than the average American community (Matthiessen, 1992).

    Here is a link to the state database of NoDak :
    http://www.ndsu.edu/sdc/data/ndamericanindians.htm

80. 80 Malcolm Kirkpatrick Apr 2nd, 2007 at 7:59 pm

    Mr. Littlefoot,

    Who operates the schools on N. Dakota’s reservations, N. Dakota school districts or the BIA? In either case, the generally poor performance of government schools serving Native American students supports my generalization that political control of school harms most the children of the least politically adept parents.

    Dr. Laden,

    From your response to the comment I left on your consolidation proposal, I had supposed that you had read Hirschliefer’s “Anarchy and it’s Breakdown” and had misunderstood the argument. From your comment, above, that “logic” indicates “holding everything else the same”, closing school districts will “gain” money, I now suppose that you have not yet done so. Please read Hirschliefer’s article.

    The empirical fact is, above a rather low level, per pupil costs rise as US State school districts increase in size. Performance falls as districts increase in size. Hirschliefer supplies, in abstract, one reason why this occurs (his argument is not about school district spending specifically or any other particular industry).

    “Everything else” does not remain “the same”. Large pools of resources attract parasites, who wrest control of district policy from parents.

81. 81 Greg Apr 3rd, 2007 at 9:04 am

    “Everything else” does not remain “the same”. Large pools of resources attract parasites, who wrest control of district policy from parents.

    I’m sure that’s true, and I’m sure that now that he problem has been identified it can be managed.

82. 82 Malcolm Kirkpatrick Apr 3rd, 2007 at 10:57 am

    The Education Intelligence Agency (google-search) has accessible statistics on district-level spending, by State. In Minnesota, the ten smallest districts over 1000 enrollment spent less, per pupil, than the ten smallest districts over 2000 enrollment and the ten smallest districts over 2000 enrollment spent less, per pupil, than the ten smallest districts over 4,000 enrollment. I don’t have a spreadsheet on this machine, so I didn’t do anything more fancy than add ten numbers in my head and divide by ten.

    Professor Laden wrote: ” ‘Large pools of resources attract parasites, who wrest control of district policy from parents.’ I’m sure that’s true and I’m sure that now that the problem has been identifies, it can be managed.”

    Consider the problem from the parasites’ point of view: “How do we represent, to taxpayers, our parasitism as legitimate education expenses? That is the problem. Now that the problem has been identified, it can be managed.”

    The parasites have a more focused interest and greater incentive to engage in this contest than does the average taxpayer, who has a regular job, and kids to feed. Parasitism is the parasite’s job and it’s how she feeds her kids. Public sector parasites are experts. This is standard “public choice” economics (e.g., Mancur Olsen, Gordon Tullock, and James Buchanan). More often than not, the parasites have journalists on their side (what other industry gets such adulatory, credulous coverage from news media?). The parasites usually win this contest.

    Utah school districts do not exhibit the “larger => more expensive” dynamic. Perhaps if everyone in Minnesota converts to LDS you might defeat the parasites and reap economies of scale through aggregation of districts beyond 1000 enrollment. Otherwise, the odds are not in taxpayers’ favor.

    If “public education” is not a make-work program for dues-paying members of the NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel, a source of padded contracts for politically-connected insiders, and a venue for State-worshipful indoctrination, why cannot any student, at any age, take an exit exam (the GED will do) and apply the taxpayers’ K-12 education subsidy toward post-secondary tuition at any VA-approved post-secondary institution or toward a wage subsidy at any qualified (say, has filed W-2 forms on at least three employees for each of the previous three years) private-sector employer?

83. 83 carte Sep 2nd, 2007 at 4:39 pm

    Lovely. Made my day (which is saying something)

84. 84 ruth calabria Oct 10th, 2007 at 4:24 pm

    We hometaught 5 kids and 5 grandkids with great success. check out our website, www.matrix-evolutions.com and get back in touch

1. 1 O’DonnellWeb - This is not a homeschooling blog » Blog Archive » Homeschooling - the Good Pingback on Mar 16th, 2007 at 3:11 pm
2. 2 Mom Is Teaching » Blog Archive » What does homeschooling look like for you? Pingback on Mar 17th, 2007 at 12:11 am
3. 3 One-Sixteenth Trackback on Mar 17th, 2007 at 10:51 am
4. 4 the gookins dot net » Blog Archive » answering the homeschooling questions Pingback on Mar 22nd, 2007 at 11:49 pm
5. 5 Cocking A Snook! Trackback on Mar 31st, 2007 at 11:52 am
6. 6 at Greg Laden Pingback on Mar 31st, 2007 at 1:06 pm
7. 7 Enrollment Size Does Not Predict Costs in Minnesota Schools at Greg Laden Pingback on Apr 3rd, 2007 at 12:28 pm

Leave a Reply