Homeschooling On The Rise??

[gallantwarrior]

I agree with allowing people the choice to home school their children. What concerns me is the lack the social interaction. Some parents are going to be good at doing this, and others not so much. It is not easy, and not everyone will have success at homeschooling their children. A lot of those parents end up sending their kids to public schools anyways.

I would really like to see money allocated equally amongst the public schools (instead of going by district), and then all the kids can have a decent chance at an education.

Not every public school has much success at schooling all children, either. And if bullying and peer pressure can be considered "social interaction"...well, OK. One-size-fits-all education fails every time.

 

[ChrisL]

I agree with allowing people the choice to home school their children. What concerns me is the lack the social interaction. Some parents are going to be good at doing this, and others not so much. It is not easy, and not everyone will have success at homeschooling their children. A lot of those parents end up sending their kids to public schools anyways.

I would really like to see money allocated equally amongst the public schools (instead of going by district), and then all the kids can have a decent chance at an education.

Not every public school has much success at schooling all children, either. And if bullying and peer pressure can be considered "social interaction"...well, OK. One-size-fits-all education fails every time.

It does not. There are plenty of successful people who attended public school.

 

[JakeStarkey]

And much about the school as well.

 

[ChrisL]

I think some kids would definitely benefit and learn more efficiently in a home environment, but that certainly isn't the case for all kids. Plenty of them do just fine in the public school environment. Of course, the quality of your public school system depends on where you live and how much funding your schools are receiving.

Now, here is where the conservatives get a little cranky. Lol. I would like to see all the funds allocated towards schools pooled together and distributed equally amongst the schools so that all the children are getting equal quality of education from their public school systems.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Now, here is where the conservatives get a little cranky. Lol. I would like to see all the funds allocated towards schools pooled together and distributed equally amongst the schools so that all the children are getting equal quality of education from their public school systems.

People vote with their pocketbooks, they move to expensive homes where nearby schools are well funded by choice so that their kids get the benefit.

If you want to implement your plan then you need to de-link school funding from property taxes because people are willing to pay higher taxes in return for benefits which accrue to them or to their neighborhood, not to people clear across the state.

The best way forward is to have the state grant each school-age student a grant and then the student attends the school of his choice and the student turns over the grant money to the school. For parents who want their kids to have a more elaborate education, the schools can charge a supplementary tuition.

No parent is EVER going to sacrifice his child's education so that some other kid can possibly derive some benefit. Most of what drives high real estate prices is the quest for good schools. Junk the school and you crash property values.

 

[ChrisL]

Now, here is where the conservatives get a little cranky. Lol. I would like to see all the funds allocated towards schools pooled together and distributed equally amongst the schools so that all the children are getting equal quality of education from their public school systems.

People vote with their pocketbooks, they move to expensive homes where nearby schools are well funded by choice so that their kids get the benefit.

If you want to implement your plan then you need to de-link school funding from property taxes because people are willing to pay higher taxes in return for benefits which accrue to them or to their neighborhood, not to people clear across the state.

The best way forward is to have the state grant each school-age student a grant and then the student attends the school of his choice and the student turns over the grant money to the school. For parents who want their kids to have a more elaborate education, the schools can charge a supplementary tuition.

No parent is EVER going to sacrifice his child's education so that some other kid can possibly derive some benefit. Most of what drives high real estate prices is the quest for good schools. Junk the school and you crash property values.

Good schools are not the only advantage to paying higher property taxes. That is a cop out, and at the cost of our society being well educated and well functioning, which in turn only makes us as a country stronger. I would be willing to bet that this is part of the reason why some other countries outperform us when it comes to academics.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Now, here is where the conservatives get a little cranky. Lol. I would like to see all the funds allocated towards schools pooled together and distributed equally amongst the schools so that all the children are getting equal quality of education from their public school systems.

People vote with their pocketbooks, they move to expensive homes where nearby schools are well funded by choice so that their kids get the benefit.

If you want to implement your plan then you need to de-link school funding from property taxes because people are willing to pay higher taxes in return for benefits which accrue to them or to their neighborhood, not to people clear across the state.

The best way forward is to have the state grant each school-age student a grant and then the student attends the school of his choice and the student turns over the grant money to the school. For parents who want their kids to have a more elaborate education, the schools can charge a supplementary tuition.

No parent is EVER going to sacrifice his child's education so that some other kid can possibly derive some benefit. Most of what drives high real estate prices is the quest for good schools. Junk the school and you crash property values.

Good schools are not the only advantage to paying higher property taxes. That is a cop out, and at the cost of our society being well educated and well functioning, which in turn only makes us as a country stronger. I would be willing to bet that this is part of the reason why some other countries outperform us when it comes to academics.

We have NO PROBLEM with underfunded schools. Schools are not the reason some kids are not well educated nor well functioning. Look at this national data. White students who are poor enough to qualify for subsidized lunch programs and who were born to high school drop-out mothers perform at the same level as black kids who are not poor and who are born to mothers who are college graduates, in other words likely middle class or upper middle class blacks.

And before I get to that data, we are not under-performing internationally. Our Asian students are, with the exception of those from the CITY of Shanghai, are the best performing in the world. Our white students come in 2nd to Finland. Our Hispanic students are the best performing Hispanics students in the world. Our black students are the best performing in the world.

 

[ChrisL]

Now, here is where the conservatives get a little cranky. Lol. I would like to see all the funds allocated towards schools pooled together and distributed equally amongst the schools so that all the children are getting equal quality of education from their public school systems.

People vote with their pocketbooks, they move to expensive homes where nearby schools are well funded by choice so that their kids get the benefit.

If you want to implement your plan then you need to de-link school funding from property taxes because people are willing to pay higher taxes in return for benefits which accrue to them or to their neighborhood, not to people clear across the state.

The best way forward is to have the state grant each school-age student a grant and then the student attends the school of his choice and the student turns over the grant money to the school. For parents who want their kids to have a more elaborate education, the schools can charge a supplementary tuition.

No parent is EVER going to sacrifice his child's education so that some other kid can possibly derive some benefit. Most of what drives high real estate prices is the quest for good schools. Junk the school and you crash property values.

Good schools are not the only advantage to paying higher property taxes. That is a cop out, and at the cost of our society being well educated and well functioning, which in turn only makes us as a country stronger. I would be willing to bet that this is part of the reason why some other countries outperform us when it comes to academics.

We have NO PROBLEM with underfunded schools. Schools are not the reason some kids are not well educated nor well functioning. Look at this national data. White students who are poor enough to qualify for subsidized lunch programs and who were born to high school drop-out mothers perform at the same level as black kids who are not poor and who are born to mothers who are college graduates, in other words likely middle class or upper middle class blacks.

And before I get to that data, we are not under-performing internationally. Our Asian students are, with the exception of those from the CITY of Shanghai, are the best performing in the world. Our white students come in 2nd to Finland. Our Hispanic students are the best performing Hispanics students in the world. Our black students are the best performing in the world.

So then you are saying that our public school system is fine? Then what are you complaining about home schooling for?

 

[Rikurzhen]

Now, here is where the conservatives get a little cranky. Lol. I would like to see all the funds allocated towards schools pooled together and distributed equally amongst the schools so that all the children are getting equal quality of education from their public school systems.

People vote with their pocketbooks, they move to expensive homes where nearby schools are well funded by choice so that their kids get the benefit.

If you want to implement your plan then you need to de-link school funding from property taxes because people are willing to pay higher taxes in return for benefits which accrue to them or to their neighborhood, not to people clear across the state.

The best way forward is to have the state grant each school-age student a grant and then the student attends the school of his choice and the student turns over the grant money to the school. For parents who want their kids to have a more elaborate education, the schools can charge a supplementary tuition.

No parent is EVER going to sacrifice his child's education so that some other kid can possibly derive some benefit. Most of what drives high real estate prices is the quest for good schools. Junk the school and you crash property values.

Good schools are not the only advantage to paying higher property taxes. That is a cop out, and at the cost of our society being well educated and well functioning, which in turn only makes us as a country stronger. I would be willing to bet that this is part of the reason why some other countries outperform us when it comes to academics.

We have NO PROBLEM with underfunded schools. Schools are not the reason some kids are not well educated nor well functioning. Look at this national data. White students who are poor enough to qualify for subsidized lunch programs and who were born to high school drop-out mothers perform at the same level as black kids who are not poor and who are born to mothers who are college graduates, in other words likely middle class or upper middle class blacks.

And before I get to that data, we are not under-performing internationally. Our Asian students are, with the exception of those from the CITY of Shanghai, are the best performing in the world. Our white students come in 2nd to Finland. Our Hispanic students are the best performing Hispanics students in the world. Our black students are the best performing in the world.

So then you are saying that our public school system is fine? Then what are you complaining about home schooling for?

The problem with public schools is 1.) liberal indoctrination, 2.) composition of students, 3.) weird liberal pedagogy.

Home schooling fixes all three problems. Private and charter schools also fix those problems. Public schools are the opposite of diversity - they all operate on the same principles and ideology.

 

[ChrisL]

Now, here is where the conservatives get a little cranky. Lol. I would like to see all the funds allocated towards schools pooled together and distributed equally amongst the schools so that all the children are getting equal quality of education from their public school systems.

People vote with their pocketbooks, they move to expensive homes where nearby schools are well funded by choice so that their kids get the benefit.

If you want to implement your plan then you need to de-link school funding from property taxes because people are willing to pay higher taxes in return for benefits which accrue to them or to their neighborhood, not to people clear across the state.

The best way forward is to have the state grant each school-age student a grant and then the student attends the school of his choice and the student turns over the grant money to the school. For parents who want their kids to have a more elaborate education, the schools can charge a supplementary tuition.

No parent is EVER going to sacrifice his child's education so that some other kid can possibly derive some benefit. Most of what drives high real estate prices is the quest for good schools. Junk the school and you crash property values.

Good schools are not the only advantage to paying higher property taxes. That is a cop out, and at the cost of our society being well educated and well functioning, which in turn only makes us as a country stronger. I would be willing to bet that this is part of the reason why some other countries outperform us when it comes to academics.

We have NO PROBLEM with underfunded schools. Schools are not the reason some kids are not well educated nor well functioning. Look at this national data. White students who are poor enough to qualify for subsidized lunch programs and who were born to high school drop-out mothers perform at the same level as black kids who are not poor and who are born to mothers who are college graduates, in other words likely middle class or upper middle class blacks.

And before I get to that data, we are not under-performing internationally. Our Asian students are, with the exception of those from the CITY of Shanghai, are the best performing in the world. Our white students come in 2nd to Finland. Our Hispanic students are the best performing Hispanics students in the world. Our black students are the best performing in the world.

So then you are saying that our public school system is fine? Then what are you complaining about home schooling for?

The problem with public schools is 1.) liberal indoctrination, 2.) composition of students, 3.) weird liberal pedagogy.

Home schooling fixes all three problems. Private and charter schools also fix those problems. Public schools are the opposite of diversity - they all operate on the same principles and ideology.

Not all public schools have a liberal indoctrination. I went to public school and my teachers stuck with the assigned curriculum for the most part. If there was any kind of attempted indoctrination, it certainly wasn't enough to have effected my thought processes.

Well, by "composition" of students, I think you mean different levels of learning amongst the student body? Well, that is why we have different levels of classes, such as Algebra I, II, III, etc. I'm certainly not saying that public schools are perfect, but then again neither is homeschooling. We NEED public schools though, and we need them to be good because that only benefits everyone.

There are also plenty of underprivileged children who are stuck going to bad schools that are not well funded, have a lot of problems, but they are smart kids with potential, so it's sad that they can't have the same opportunities to learn and grow as kids from the richer neighborhoods.

 

[Tresha91203]

There are many resources out there today that make homeschooling a great option for lots of families. As mentioned above the K12 curriculum is really good. My organization works with several homeschooled children and it is our main resource.

there are good resources out there now, i don't disagree. but again, there's no reason those resources couldn't be used with kids in public schools to supplement or enhance their education.

Some public schools are cesspools with few, if any, redeeming qualities. If the public school system has a high rate of pregnancies in middle school, and a high rate of second and third pregnancies in high school, it is better to not send my (non existent) daughters there.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Not all public schools have a liberal indoctrination. I went to public school and my teachers stuck with the assigned curriculum for the most part. If there was any kind of attempted indoctrination, it certainly wasn't enough to have effected my thought processes.

1.) Things have changed.
2.) Indoctrination isn't often recognized as indoctrination by those who are inside the process. Think of it like this, people in Wisconsin don't realize that using the word bubbler instead of water fountain speaks to their acculturation, or people in the East saying "soda" instead of "pop" doing the same. Liberals have been on a mission to March Through The Institutions. A lot of values that people have picked up have come though schools indoctrinating.

Well, by "composition" of students, I think you mean different levels of learning amongst the student body?

A good citizen will argue this but in real life "good students" equates with "few minority students." People know this but don't speak of it. Look at that table I provided. It's scandalous that a poor white student from parents who are high school drop-outs out-perform blacks kids from college educated parents. So when you find a middle class or upper middle class neighborhood you will get a pretty good school, but once middle class blacks move into that neighborhood, then the quality of the school will begin to decline and people will start moving out of the neighborhood in search of "better quality" schools.

Look back in American history, our public schools had higher levels of class diversity than they do today. The school student body was all white, or mostly all white. There were no really significant problems with class mixing. Archie Andrews could go to the same school as Veronica Lodge and not problem - all of the students where roughly in the same tiers and when tracking was instituted, that solved most of the remaining problems.

Well, that is why we have different levels of classes, such as Algebra I, II, III, etc. I'm certainly not saying that public schools are perfect, but then again neither is homeschooling. We NEED public schools though, and we need them to be good because that only benefits everyone.

The school doesn't make good student outcomes, it's the student who does that. we can get good student outcomes from good students no matter where they are educated.

There are also plenty of underprivileged children who are stuck going to bad schools that are not well funded, have a lot of problems, but they are smart kids with potential, so it's sad that they can't have the same opportunities to learn and grow as kids from the richer neighborhoods.

There are no "bad schools" there are rather schools with bad students. Check out this no-holds barred experiment:

For decades critics of the public schools have been saying, "You can't solve educational problems by throwing money at them." The education establishment and its supporters have replied, "No one's ever tried." In Kansas City they did try. To improve the education of black students and encourage desegregation, a federal judge invited the Kansas City, Missouri, School District to come up with a cost-is-no-object educational plan and ordered local and state taxpayers to find the money to pay for it.

Kansas City spent as much as $11,700 per pupil--more money per pupil, on a cost of living adjusted basis, than any other of the 280 largest districts in the country. The money bought higher teachers' salaries, 15 new schools, and such amenities as an Olympic-sized swimming pool with an underwater viewing room, television and animation studios, a robotics lab, a 25-acre wildlife sanctuary, a zoo, a model United Nations with simultaneous translation capability, and field trips to Mexico and Senegal. The student-teacher ratio was 12 or 13 to 1, the lowest of any major school district in the country.

The results were dismal. Test scores did not rise; the black-white gap did not diminish; and there was less, not greater, integration.

The Kansas City experiment suggests that, indeed, educational problems can't be solved by throwing money at them, that the structural problems of our current educational system are far more important than a lack of material resources, and that the focus on desegregation diverted attention from the real problem, low achievement.​

 

[ChrisL]

1.) Things have changed.
2.) Indoctrination isn't often recognized as indoctrination by those who are inside the process. Think of it like this, people in Wisconsin don't realize that using the word bubbler instead of water fountain speaks to their acculturation, or people in the East saying "soda" instead of "pop" doing the same. Liberals have been on a mission to March Through The Institutions. A lot of values that people have picked up have come though schools indoctrinating.

Well, that is one reason why I'm against teachers unions. Don't get me wrong though, I am pro "industry" unions. Lol. That is another topic though, so let's not get side tracked, but teachers should be paid on merit, IMO.

A good citizen will argue this but in real life "good students" equates with "few minority students." People know this but don't speak of it. Look at that table I provided. It's scandalous that a poor white student from parents who are high school drop-outs out-perform blacks kids from college educated parents. So when you find a middle class or upper middle class neighborhood you will get a pretty good school, but once middle class blacks move into that neighborhood, then the quality of the school will begin to decline and people will start moving out of the neighborhood in search of "better quality" schools.

I think this is because of the poor neighborhoods where there is a lot of gang activity and crime. That happens where there is poverty.

Look back in American history, our public schools had higher levels of class diversity than they do today. The school student body was all white, or mostly all white. There were no really significant problems with class mixing. Archie Andrews could go to the same school as Veronica Lodge and not problem - all of the students where roughly in the same tiers and when tracking was instituted, that solved most of the remaining problems.

Well now, I KNOW that is just not true. I grew up in a small town, and there were not many black kids that I went to school with, but the few who did attend were very smart kids. It's because they grew up in a more middle class environment instead of in the ghetto and had the same opportunities. I think a lot of students would do a lot better with better teachers, better learning environments, etc., and all that comes from better funding and, of course, again there is the dastardly teachers union. Lol!

The school doesn't make good student outcomes, it's the student who does that. we can get good student outcomes from good students no matter where they are educated.

I disagree. Better schools and better teachers turn out better students. There is the point that different people learn at different levels though, but there are no easy solutions for that in the public school system. It is what it is. It's the best we have right now for those who cannot home school their children for whatever reason.

There are no "bad schools" there are rather schools with bad students. Check out this no-holds barred experiment:

For decades critics of the public schools have been saying, "You can't solve educational problems by throwing money at them." The education establishment and its supporters have replied, "No one's ever tried." In Kansas City they did try. To improve the education of black students and encourage desegregation, a federal judge invited the Kansas City, Missouri, School District to come up with a cost-is-no-object educational plan and ordered local and state taxpayers to find the money to pay for it.

Kansas City spent as much as $11,700 per pupil--more money per pupil, on a cost of living adjusted basis, than any other of the 280 largest districts in the country. The money bought higher teachers' salaries, 15 new schools, and such amenities as an Olympic-sized swimming pool with an underwater viewing room, television and animation studios, a robotics lab, a 25-acre wildlife sanctuary, a zoo, a model United Nations with simultaneous translation capability, and field trips to Mexico and Senegal. The student-teacher ratio was 12 or 13 to 1, the lowest of any major school district in the country.

The results were dismal. Test scores did not rise; the black-white gap did not diminish; and there was less, not greater, integration.

The Kansas City experiment suggests that, indeed, educational problems can't be solved by throwing money at them, that the structural problems of our current educational system are far more important than a lack of material resources, and that the focus on desegregation diverted attention from the real problem, low achievement.​

I have to disagree with this. I worked a lot today, and I'm very tired and unmotivated to look right now, but I've seen other studies that say the opposite, that when students are afforded better educational opportunities, they excel. I'll try to find it tomorrow or something.

 

[Rikurzhen]

I think this is because of the poor neighborhoods where there is a lot of gang activity and crime. That happens where there is poverty.

America has spent trillions of dollars trying to get to the root causes of poor education outcomes and we've even done massive experiments on your question. Here from the National Bureau of Economic Research:

Neighborhoods and Academic Achievement: Results from the Moving to Opportunity Experiment

Families originally living in public housing were assigned housing vouchers by lottery, encouraging moves to neighborhoods with lower poverty rates. Although we had hypothesized that reading and math test scores would be higher among children in families offered vouchers (with larger effects among younger children), the results show no significant effects on test scores for any age group among over 5000 children ages 6 to 20 in 2002 who were assessed four to seven years after randomization. Program impacts on school environments were considerably smaller than impacts on neighborhoods, suggesting that achievement-related benefits from improved neighborhood environments are alone small.​

That's a large experiment, 5,000 kids of varied ages and followed for seven years. Lot's of time for good neighborhoods and schools to influence the kids

Well now, I KNOW that is just not true. I grew up in a small town, and there were not many black kids that I went to school with, but the few who did attend were very smart kids. It's because they grew up in a more middle class environment instead of in the ghetto and had the same opportunities. I think a lot of students would do a lot better with better teachers, better learning environments, etc., and all that comes from better funding and, of course, again there is the dastardly teachers union. Lol!

Spend a minute and think about this data:

Their performance wasn't due to going your school, it was due to their being born to middle class parents.

I disagree. Better schools and better teachers turn out better students. There is the point that different people learn at different levels though, but there are no easy solutions for that in the public school system. It is what it is. It's the best we have right now for those who cannot home school their children for whatever reason.

It's hard to do better than Princeton High School - fabulous teachers, well funded, rich neighborhood, professor's kids:

An uneasy amalgam of pride and discontent, Caroline Mitchell sat amid the balloons and beach chairs on the front lawn of Princeton High School, watching the Class of 2004 graduate. Her pride was for the seniors' average SAT score of 1237, third-highest in the state, and their admission to elite universities like Harvard, Yale and Duke. As president of the high school alumni association and community liaison for the school district, Ms. Mitchell deserved to bask in the tradition of public-education excellence.

Discontent, though, was what she felt about Blake, her own son. He was receiving his diploma on this June afternoon only after years of struggle - the failed English class in ninth grade, the science teacher who said he was capable only of C's, the assignment to a remedial "basic skills" class. Even at that, Ms. Mitchell realized, Blake had fared better than several friends who were nowhere to be seen in the procession of gowns and mortarboards. They were headed instead for summer school.

"I said to myself: 'Oh, no. Please, no,' " Ms. Mitchell recalled. "I was so hurt. These were bright kids. This shouldn't have been happening."

It did not escape Ms. Mitchell's perception that her son and most of those faltering classmates were black. They were the evidence of a prosperous, accomplished school district's dirty little secret, a racial achievement gap that has been observed, acknowledged and left uncorrected for decades. Now that pattern just may have to change under the pressure of the federal No Child Left Behind law.

Several months after Blake graduated, Princeton High School (and thus the district as a whole) ran afoul of the statute for the first time, based on the lagging scores of African-American students on a standardized English test given to 11th graders. Last month, the school was cited for the second year in a row, this time because 37 percent of black students failed to meet standards in English, and 55 percent of blacks and 40 percent of Hispanics failed in math.

One of the standard complaints about No Child Left Behind by its critics in public education is that it punishes urban schools that are chronically underfinanced and already contending with a concentration of poor, nonwhite, bilingual and special-education pupils. Princeton could hardly be more different. It is an Ivy League town with a minority population of slightly more than 10 percent and per-student spending well above the state average. The high school sends 94 percent of its graduates to four-year colleges and offers 29 different Advanced Placement courses. Over all, 98 percent of Princeton High School students exceed the math and English standards required by No Child Left Behind.​

If Princeton High School can't solve that problem, then what do imagine we can do that isn't already being done?

 

[Physics Hunter]

We are homeschooling our kids.

I went to public school, there was more fighting, sex and dope than learning.

I was lucky, I did my homework while listening to the next class lecture, looking out the window, and playing my favorite music in the back of my mind.

The best part of Homeschooling is all the history stuff I learn by playing history memory lessons in the car and reading historical stuff to my kids in the evenings. Essentially, I am being homeschooled too.

 

[Samson]

Homeschooling improves the educational outcome more due to the personal involvement of the "teachers" involved. If teachers were left to their own devices, to use their talents, many would be surprised at the outcome for public school students. I know many teachers. One of the reasons I teach at the University and not in K-12 public schools is because my students have a vested interest in their educational outcome.

Most reasons WHY Home-Schooled students have better test scores than Public School Students are as irrelevant as they are obvious: Home-schooled students by definition have many environmental advantages over Public School students that the Public School will never be able to match. Plus the population of home-schooled students is very small (<4% of total US students) and probably very select (their parents likely began home schooling while they were in the womb). These parents did not just appear in 1996 when home-schooling became legal in all 50 states, and since then the concern of parents about public school teaching quality has not increased much more than it was in 1986, 1976, or 1966, etc. What has changed? Internet access to online curriculum, making home-schooled lesson plans and structure much easier to maintain so they can target successful completion of standardized tests.

What is extraordinary is the attention that such a small population draws from both sides of the partisan spectrum:

Educational Conservatives use the success of <4% of total students (see OP) as some sort of evidence that ALL efforts to educate ALL students attending ALL Public Schools are failing. Clearly, this is not the case.

Educational "Liberals" react to the success of <4% of total students learning outside the public school system as some sort of major tragedy threatening ALL Public Schools.
Again this is clearly not the case.

If any group should be very concerned about this growing 4%, it should be Private Schools. They are the real competitive substitute for home-schooled students. Parents will find that the economic benefit that home-schooling offers may make it a very popular choice. In fact, I foresee a tremendous rise in demand what was once called "governesses" or private tutors, employed in homes not only of the wealthy, but also in the upper-middle, and even middle class to substitute for private schooling.

 

[Unkotare]

If any group should be very concerned about this growing 4%, it should be Private Schools.

Not to worry, private schools are booming.

 

[Andylusion]

We are homeschooling our kids.

I went to public school, there was more fighting, sex and dope than learning.

I was lucky, I did my homework while listening to the next class lecture, looking out the window, and playing my favorite music in the back of my mind.

The best part of Homeschooling is all the history stuff I learn by playing history memory lessons in the car and reading historical stuff to my kids in the evenings. Essentially, I am being homeschooled too.

I had a similar experience. I learned more about which girls were easy to screw, who the drug dealers were, and when and where was the best time to get a hit, and while I didn't get in many fights, being 6 foot 2, and 200 lbs, I was always on guard.

I've learned far more than I ever did in school, by reading biographies, and history, and of course my favorite topic, economics.

 

[Samson]

If any group should be very concerned about this growing 4%, it should be Private Schools.

Not to worry, private schools are booming.

Figure 1. Private school enrollment in prekindergarten (preK) through grade 12, by grade level: School years 1995–96 through 2011–12

The Condition of Education - Participation in Education - Elementary Secondary Enrollment - Private School Enrollment - Indicator January 2014

 

[Unkotare]

Someone is missing the fact that school-aged people are declining, and that obamanomics has pushed more people further away from the upper end of middle class.

Someone is also missing the enormous number of international students flocking to America to enroll in our schools.


Fast Facts


More Chinese Students Attend K-12 Schools in the United States Study in the States