Question to the parents and teachers out there...

[gi]

I was wondering if you would do what some of these parents have done. Since I have no children right now I feel my opinion is not worth that much. Though I feel bad that there is no accountability. Teachers, do you think this is a correct way to educate childern? Old story, sorry about that.

A World Without F's - Michelle Malkin

Michelle Malkin

June 19, 2002

A world without F's

School's out. What did your children learn this year? Across the country, one poisonous lesson was pumped into the systems of self-esteem-inflated students: There is no such thing as failure. Christine Pelton, a now-famous former biology teacher at Piper High School in Piper, Kansas, resigned last month when her school board -- pressured by angry parents -- refused to support her flunking of nearly 30 students who plagiarized. Two lesser-known teachers also refused to play along with the education establishment's dumbing-down games. They tried to give out F's, too. Their reward for showing children that slacking off has consequences? Humiliation, intimidation and litigation.

Erich Martel, a history teacher at Wilson Senior High School in Washington, D.C., issued an F last year to a girl who took his Advanced Placement U.S. history course. It was enough to prevent her from graduating. But when the school held its commencement ceremony, there was the student -- strolling across the stage in her cap and gown.

Martel checked the school's computer system. The student's grade had been boosted to a D. "It was a feeling of being sabotaged, a feeling of being undermined, that for reasons that have nothing to do with the student's performance, there are shortcuts around a teacher's legitimate grade," Martel told The Washington Post last week. And he wasn't alone. Martel discovered at least 11 cases in which students' grades were raised without the knowledge of his fellow teachers.

One student earned a D, which her father protested because his daughter "needed a high grade-point average" to go to college. The teacher relented and gave the student a chance to retake the final exam. Her score was even lower. The teacher kept the original grade. But Martel later discovered that it had been changed to a "P" (for "Pass"). "I could not believe it," the overruled teacher, Anexora Skvirsky said. "I am absolutely alarmed. It is uncalled for. It is intolerable. It's like cheating. It's like lying. It's like fraud." Like?

As for those responsible for altering the grades, the D.C. schools are sending a consistent message: Screw up, move up. The assistant high school principal who changed the grade of Martel's student is now a principal at an elementary school in the district. And Wilson High's former principal, who also altered grades, is now an assistant superintendent overseeing the city's high schools. She justifies the grade changes because they were "unfair."

"Unfair" is the same gripe that came from the parents of a high school senior at Sunrise Mountain High School in Glendale, Ariz. When their daughter flunked a required English class, which she needed to pass in order to graduate, Mom and Dad did the natural thing in a no-consequences world: They hired a lawyer.

In a missive that would make the parody writers at the satirical newspaper The Onion blush, attorney Stan F. Massad demanded that teacher Elizabeth Joice "take whatever action is necessary to correct this situation so that it can be settled amicably. Failing that, you will force us to institute litigation." Massad claimed that his client "has been very sick, unable to sleep or eat and she has been forced to seek medical attention. To say that she has experienced Severe Emotional and Physical Distress over this matter is an understatement."

Turning up the sob-story volume, Massad bemoaned: "The student was all ready to graduate and, now, at the eleventh hour she is told that she will not. As you know, the student is on the Student Council and she was looking forward to speaking at the Graduation Ceremonies. It is certainly a shame that this young lady's life has now been ruined forever." (The full text of the bullying letter is available at http://www.azcentral.com/news/articl...letter-ON.html.)

The Arizona Republic reported that just hours before her graduation last month, the student was allowed to take a retest -- over Joice's objections. The student passed the retest and got her diploma. Life, she has learned from her litigious parents and obsequious school officials, is one big do-over.

Whiny parents wonder why public schools have abandoned standards, forsaken accountability and adopted appeasement as their primary educational mission. Oh, who could be to blame for such an abysmal abdication of responsibility? Who?

[Bubba Wheels]

This is why home-schooling, charter schools, private schools, ect... continue to explode in popularity and attendance across the country while traditional public schools continue to struggle in test scores and lose students in mass exodus' elsewhere (Detroit Public Schools, for instance). Parents it would seem want teachers to teach and not social engineer.

[gi]

Originally Posted by Bubba Wheels

This is why home-schooling, charter schools, private schools, ect... continue to explode in popularity and attendance across the country while traditional public schools continue to struggle in test scores and lose students in mass exodus' elsewhere (Detroit Public Schools, for instance). Parents it would seem want teachers to teach and not social engineer.

DPS has more issues than that.

Isn't part of teaching, social engineering to some extent?

[gi]

Originally Posted by SunDancer

But how do you prepare these kids for college? These kids won't have their mommies and daddies to support them.

Would it be too early to assume that they would get a lawyer?

[SunDancer]

But how do you prepare these kids for college? These kids won't have their mommies and daddies to support them.

[Bubba Wheels]

Originally Posted by gi

DPS has more issues than that.

Isn't part of teaching, social engineering to some extent?

I use 'social engineering' in this context to describe an ongoing, calculated effort by 'elites' to undermine traditional foundations of values and learning.

A major reason for this occurring, as I understand it, is because the 'teacher colleges' have devised ciriculums that are all about HOW to teach, and not about WHAT to teach. Some pretty scarey studies on this, some going so far as to suggest we are getting the worst and the dimmest being churned out of the institutions as teachers that just follow 'party politics', and have little clue as to actual subject matter.

[SunDancer]

Originally Posted by gi

Would it be too early to assume that they would get a lawyer?

Yes, but colleges and public high schools are differnet. The relationship in college is not betwen parnets-students-teachers, but the student is responsible for themselves in college.

[gi]

Originally Posted by Bubba Wheels

I use 'social engineering' in this context to describe an ongoing, calculated effort by 'elites' to undermine traditional foundations of values and learning.

A major reason for this occurring, as I understand it, is because the 'teacher colleges' have devised ciriculums that are all about HOW to teach, and not about WHAT to teach. Some pretty scarey studies on this, some going so far as to suggest we are getting the worst and the dimmest being churned out of the institutions as teachers that just follow 'party politics', and have little clue as to actual subject matter.

Quality of teachers would be another great thread. I wish they were paid very very well. They are teaching our childern for the future of this/your country. It should be a job that is well compensated.

[Franklinnoble]

Originally Posted by SunDancer

But how do you prepare these kids for college? These kids won't have their mommies and daddies to support them.

Actually, on average, home schooled children do substantially better than publicly schooled children on standardized tests and in college GPA. The stance that one needs public education to do well in college is a complete myth.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by SunDancer

But how do you prepare these kids for college? These kids won't have their mommies and daddies to support them.

The home-schooled kids that I know tend to do *extremely* well in college.

[gi]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

The home-schooled kids that I know tend to do *extremely* well in college.

When home-schooling a child, the student pool seems to be less than at a public/private school. What effect on socialization does this have on a child? Studies that are published? Do extra steps need to be taken for good socialization? Like sports...etc. I would really like to see if anyone knows of long-term studies that were done about this.

[gi]

Originally Posted by Franklinnoble

Actually, on average, home schooled children do substantially better than publicly schooled children on standardized tests and in college GPA. The stance that one needs public education to do well in college is a complete myth.

Do people turn out to be 'better' (socially) when in a very diverse education system? That would be the only question I would have on child development. Academically, I could easily see home-schooling surpassing public schooling.

[Bubba Wheels]

Originally Posted by gi

When home-schooling a child, the student pool seems to be less than at a public/private school. What effect on socialization does this have on a child? Studies that are published? Do extra steps need to be taken for good socialization? Like sports...etc. I would really like to see if anyone knows of long-term studies that were done about this.

I am not an expert on this, but I do know that among the home-schooled very involved 'networks' have sprung up that foster socialization, sports, ect...; this is really a revolution in the early stages still.

And again, to continue to beat on this, interesting that by not being involved at ANY level, the 'Elites' are incredibly alarmed at this occurrance.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by gi

When home-schooling a child, the student pool seems to be less than at a public/private school. What effect on socialization does this have on a child? Studies that are published? Do extra steps need to be taken for good socialization? Like sports...etc. I would really like to see if anyone knows of long-term studies that were done about this.

Well, here in metro Atlanta, at least, there are tons of socialization options available. There are home school networks around, and there was even a high school football league recently for home-schooled kids started recently.

I'm not sure what you'd measure in a study regarding socialization, but I *have* seen studies regarding academic achievement, and as has been mentioned, the home-schooled kids rate very well in those studies.

[Franklinnoble]

Originally Posted by gi

Do people turn out to be 'better' (socially) when in a very diverse education system? That would be the only question I would have on child development. Academically, I could easily see home-schooling surpassing public schooling.

This is a good question. I asked the same thing when I was considering home schooling for my son.

There are support group networks all over the place. Home schoolers go on field trips together and even take some classes together, when it makes sense to pool resources. There are ample opportunities for socialization via sports leagues, Boy Scouts, church groups, and other special interests (i.e. - martial arts classes, dance classes, etc). In fact, because most home schoolers spend more time with adults than publicly schooled kids, they emerge much more well-adjusted for mature, real-world living, in many cases.

[SunDancer]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

The home-schooled kids that I know tend to do *extremely* well in college.

Oh, I meant the question specifically for the parnets of those who send their sons/daugthers to public school, then sue like the ones mention in the article the high schools, but after they get to college.

[gi]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

Well, here in metro Atlanta, at least, there are tons of socialization options available. There are home school networks around, and there was even a high school football league recently for home-schooled kids started recently.

I'm not sure what you'd measure in a study regarding socialization, but I *have* seen studies regarding academic achievement, and as has been mentioned, the home-schooled kids rate very well in those studies.

I guess the question I would have for you would be: Do you think it is needed to go the extra step as a parent and take advantage of all of these socalization options? When I was at public and at private school we have 'forced' socialization that at the time I didn't see the value, but now I do.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by gi

I guess the question I would have for you would be: Do you think it is needed to go the extra step as a parent and take advantage of all of these socalization options? When I was at public and at private school we have 'forced' socialization that at the time I didn't see the value, but now I do.

I would say yes to that.

FWIW, I get this question a ton from Christ-centered parents. From what I've seen in 15+ years in youth ministry, my counsel is always the same, and what my wife and I plan on doing: home or small private school through 8th grade, then government or large private high school. If they insist on a sheltered high school environment (home or small private), then I strongly encourage them to take advantage of all socialization options--not so much for the reasons I'm guessing you might think, though.

[gi]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

I get this question a ton from Christ-centered parents.

And I guess one Freethinking Atheist non-parent too. Though maybe in the future I will be able to solve that non-parent issue.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Samdari

Is there some dramatic shift in SD/SWMBO procreation policy we have not been made aware of?

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

what my wife and I plan on doing

Is there some dramatic shift in SD/SWMBO procreation policy we have not been made aware of?

[albionmoonlight]

Mrs. A and I are seriously thinking of home schooling/private schooling/charter schooling any little albionmoonlights that might come along.

Public schooling is a hard issue because you have so many interests to balance--the state's interest in producing a certain kind of citizen; the parent's interest in raising their children; the teacher's interest in autonomy; the school's interest in avoiding litigation and remaining successful; the student's interest in guiding their own lives.

You can't please most of the people most of the time; it is therefore no wonder that most people are not happy with public school systems at any given place and time.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

"What we plan on doing" in relation to educating children did not match information given in this post:

Originally Posted by SkyDog

Honestly, she and I are both just selfish enough that we like our lives the way they are. We have been told, and both believe, that we'd be good parents. It just always seems that when we talk about it, one of us is in the place of "Well, I think I want kids eventually, but I'm not sure I'm ready for that much change just yet." Sometimes that person is me, and sometimes it is her. The discussion then ends up getting tabled for the next several months, etc. This has gone on for over six years of marriage, now. At some point in the fairly near future, we're going to have to get serious about making the decision as to whether or not we want to have kids at all, due to her biological clock. (Interestingly enough, although she works in the adoption field, she is pretty much dead-set against us adopting, so that's not an option.)

[cougarfreak]

I am a teacher, and I can tell you why home schooled students do better "after" high school and on college entrance exams, etc. It's because they have parents that CARE. Public school teachers can do all they want, but if there is no support at home (which is becoming more and more common), you are banging your head against a wall. People bash public school teacher's quality, test results, etc. and I can honestly say that public schools are becoming the "leftovers", or the place where people who don't care about their children's education, send their kids. I teach strictly honors kids now, and I still get good kids, who care about their education, and for the most part have support at home, but if you want a real dose of what teachers deal with........take a stroll down a high school hallway between classes or before/after school. It's mind boggling.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Samdari

"What we plan on doing" in relation to educating children did not match information given in this post:

Ah....gotcha. I was a bit lazy in the post in this thread. Technically, it should have read, "what we plan on doing if we have kids..."

It's funny. We're not sure about having kids, but we talk about how we'd raise them a good bit. It definitely comes with the territory of both of our involvement with teenagers for so long. (She has been a very involved volunteer leader with HS kids for 12 years....) It really is remarkable how often people who have 3 or 4 kids come to us for advice on raising 'em. Go figure. At any rate, inevitably, the aftermath of a conversation with a parent always ends with us talking together about how we'd do it.

[Godzilla Blitz]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

Actually, on average, home schooled children do substantially better than publicly schooled children on standardized tests and in college GPA.

I wonder if there is causality with this or is it simply a correlation? I would think home-schooled kids come on average come from relatively well-off families, and economic status is strongly correlated with academic success.

Regarding the article, I'm amazed that a school administration would change a student's grade without the teacher's involvement. I teach in high school in the mornings, and I would be furious if an administrator did that.

I've taught for a number of years, and have had a couple of situations where a senior got senioritis, stopped working in my class, failed it, and needed to take summer school to graduate. In these cases, the administration supported me to the fullest. We all felt the same way: actions have consequences, and if you stop working in a class and fail it, well, tough luck. You shouldn't have stopped working.

Regarding the make-up tests, in certain situations I would be willing to do that, but it would depend on the circumstances. My ultimate concern is that the students learn the material, and if there were unusual circumstances involved in a failing grade, I would be willing to work something out. However, in cases where this has happened to me, I've made it clear to the student early on that they are in danger of failing, and the failure has been one of complete disregard for the course by the student.

[gi]

Originally Posted by Godzilla Blitz

I wonder if there is causality with this or is it simply a correlation? I would think home-schooled kids come on average come from relatively well-off families, and economic status is strongly correlated with academic success.

I just finished my Stats class for my MBA...give me the data and I'll use SPSS to do come graphs for you!

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Godzilla Blitz

I wonder if there is causality with this or is it simply a correlation? I would think home-schooled kids come on average come from relatively well-off families, and economic status is strongly correlated with academic success.

Isn't parental involvement even more strongly correlated, though?

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by cougarfreak

if you want a real dose of what teachers deal with........take a stroll down a high school hallway between classes or before/after school. It's mind boggling.

Well, of course I've done that a few hundred times in my day. I know exactly what you're talking about. The impact of parental involvement cannot be overstated.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

At any rate, inevitably, the aftermath of a conversation with a parent always ends with us talking together about how we'd do it.

In this instance, I would recommend against the Ladies' Man method.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

In this instance, I would recommend against the Ladies' Man method.

Walked right into that one...

[Subby]

I am fortunate to live in one of the best counties in the country for public education. Not everyone has the type of access my kids have, however...so homeschooling or charter schools make sense...

[AENeuman]

Originally Posted by Bubba Wheels

I use 'social engineering' in this context to describe an ongoing, calculated effort by 'elites' to undermine traditional foundations of values and learning.

A major reason for this occurring, as I understand it, is because the 'teacher colleges' have devised ciriculums that are all about HOW to teach, and not about WHAT to teach. Some pretty scarey studies on this, some going so far as to suggest we are getting the worst and the dimmest being churned out of the institutions as teachers that just follow 'party politics', and have little clue as to actual subject matter.

First, not sure what "traditional foundations of values and learning" means. Whose foundations and values? Those that benefited? There have certainly been a lot of people who did not benefit from those traditonal methods and values. But that's not to say the methods now are better, both are dysfunctional. I do not think you can underestimate parental influence. Seems that the parents act in a pretty non-"traditional" way in raising their kids, such as allowing plagiarism, demanding grade changes.

Second, as someone in a teaching program it makes perfect sense that I'm learning how to teach. Our under grad is suppose to be in our subject. Plus everyone (since the No Child Left Behind Law) has to take are VERY comprehensive subject matter test. There are test for math, science, history, english, second languages, etc. It assumed that everyone will have to take the test at least twice to pass (3 sections). I my class the Cal, Stanford, Santa Cruz, Harvard, Columbia students all failed (one or more sections) their first time on the subject of their degrees. I guess the No Child Law was in reaction in some part to the lack of teacher knowledge, but I think the real problems happen when the administration puts any teacher in to fill gaps, such as having me teach math with my history degree.

[Subby]

Originally Posted by revrew

BTW, in the interest of full disclosure, my wife and I homeschool our children.

Only because they don't make buses big enough to cart all your kids to school.

[revrew]

Just wanted to challenge the assumption that homeschooled children typically come from a wealthier class. In my experience in the midwest, the opposite is true, especially as many of these families give up mom's job to homeschool.

That homeschooled children are more likely (statistically) to have more involved parents is an obvious observation and must be taken into account when considering the adacemic success of HS children.

The social advantages of homeschooling have been studied, and homeschooled children did surpass their public schooled peers in social skills and consciousness...but alas, I can't remember the source for the specific studies. I might if I did some research, but I haven't the time right now.

BTW, in the interest of full disclosure, my wife and I homeschool our children.

[cougarfreak]

Originally Posted by revrew

Just wanted to challenge the assumption that homeschooled children typically come from a wealthier class. In my experience in the midwest, the opposite is true, especially as many of these families give up mom's job to homeschool.

That homeschooled children are more likely (statistically) to have more involved parents is an obvious observation and must be taken into account when considering the adacemic success of HS children.

The social advantages of homeschooling have been studied, and homeschooled children did surpass their public schooled peers in social skills and consciousness...but alas, I can't remember the source for the specific studies. I might if I did some research, but I haven't the time right now.

BTW, in the interest of full disclosure, my wife and I homeschool our children.

It always amazes me when studies say that "so and so children surpass the public school children in whatever". Do they ever stop and think that the very same homeschooled children would have turned out fine if they would have stayed in public education anyway? It's almost saying something similar to........the football coach at USC does a better job with his players because a higher percentage of them succeed in the NFL than does the football coach at Joe Schmoo University. You can't measure one group of student's success against another group of students unless you also do it beforehand to get a decent baseline. The bottom line is there are kids out there that will do well no matter where you put them, whether it's at a homeschool, or at a public school. The difference is.........parental involvement with those that homeschool there kids. How many homeschool kids fail? Probably none, their parents won't let them, and hell........it's a one on one evironment.

[WussGawd]

Michelle Malkin? Is this the Asian-American who says it's ok to throw Asian-Americans into concentration camps?

I'd recommend taking anything this woman writes or says with a block, not a grain, of salt.

[duckman]

I'm studying to be a teacher and I will agree with cougarfreak about parent involvement. If the child's parents don't give a flip about their education then the child's chances of succeed in school will diminish greatly. Many parents who send their children to public schools view it as a built-in babysitter. They don't care if their children get an education as long as they are out the parent's hair. That's why I would like to teach in a private school because the parents are more involved and would make my job so much easier. I also would be greatly bothered with seeing smart kids not living up to their potentials because of the lack of support.

[thealmighty]

<---high school teacher, Dallas.

Parent night, I have standing room only during my honors/Pre-AP sessions. In the regular sessions, I have 2 or 3 parents.

My thought is that if the child who does poorly would have grown up in a home with the honors parent, that child would be an honors student in the majority of cases. I see brains out the ass on most children, but many have no clue what to do with theirs, or to what end. Many of the most intelligent students I have ever had were heavy duty gang assholes or drug dealers, etc...

P.S.- this is not an indictment of those parents in toto, as many, I am sure, care and others, no doubt, have not been 'raised' in an educational environment for parents where they felt welcome/part of their childs education.

[Munsonian]

In Muncie, I only know or have met a handful of home-schooled kids. They're all pretty smart, very wealthy, from very religious, conservative families, and are all total dicks.

[AZSpeechCoach]

High School English teacher.

I believe another aspect, in addition to the aforementioned parental involvement, in the success of homeschooled children is the limited size of the classes. I see 25 children at a time, for 1 hour a day. Homeschooling, at least what I've observed, is a lengthy process, with fewer than 5 students per teacher/parent (except in rev's case). That alone leads to more success. If the public schools used that model, you would see a huge jump in achievement. I would love to be able to sit down with each student, as the home-school model allows, and analyze strengths and weaknesses in each aspect of their education. Instead, I have 55 minutes per day. My district has also decided that student engagement is the key to student success, so I am charged with leading whole class activities. If I were to work with one student at a time, I would be placed on remediation for not engaging the entire group at the same time.

As an aside, we have a senior on our team who was home-schooled up until this year. The kid is the sweetest person, and is brilliant, with multiple AP tests and college courses already under his belt, but he desparately needed socialization. He can be difficult to coach, because he has learned throughout his life that everything that he does is wonderful, and it is a shock for him to learn that he actually needs to work hard to achieve success. Plus, he has a fetish for asian women. A bit creepy. But that has nothing to do with home-schooling.

[duckman]

Originally Posted by AZSpeechCoach

Plus, he has a fetish for asian women. A bit creepy. But that has nothing to do with home-schooling.

I like how you threw that in there.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by AZSpeechCoach

I believe another aspect, in addition to the aforementioned parental involvement, in the success of homeschooled children is the limited size of the classes.

Out of curiosity, how do you reconcile this belief with studies that show no significant gain in performance connected to smaller class sizes? Specifically, mostly because it's the one I've seen cited most frequently, the results of the estimated $8 billion dollar California experiment that started in 1996, reducing class sizes but provided no evidence that the project improved scores.

An evaluation consortium concluded that "achievement has been increasing during CSR's implementation," the researchers concluded that there "was no strong association between differences in exposure [to reduction efforts] and differences in achievement effects during this period."

Or more broadly (and probably better to my point) -- how do you reconcile that belief with the findings described here
"There have been close to 300 separate studies nation-wide on the relationship between class size and student achievement. Professor Eric Hanushek, an economist at the University of Rochester, reviewed these studies and discovered that only 15 percent of them suggest that reducing class size improves student learning as measured by standardized tests.

Indeed, in 72 percent of the studies reviewed, there was no statistically significant effect on measurable student achievement associated with smaller classes. Even more surprisingly, in 13 percent of the studies reviewed, student test scores actually declined as class size was reduced. In sum,a full 85 percent of all of the studies on class size and student achievement found that reducing class size did not improve student performance. "

[duckman]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Out of curiosity, how do you reconcile this belief with studies that show no significant gain in performance connected to smaller class sizes? Specifically, mostly because it's the one I've seen cited most frequently, the results of the estimated $8 billion dollar California experiment that started in 1996, reducing class sizes but provided no evidence that the project improved scores.

An evaluation consortium concluded that "achievement has been increasing during CSR's implementation," the researchers concluded that there "was no strong association between differences in exposure [to reduction efforts] and differences in achievement effects during this period."

Or more broadly (and probably better to my point) -- how do you reconcile that belief with the findings described here
"There have been close to 300 separate studies nation-wide on the relationship between class size and student achievement. Professor Eric Hanushek, an economist at the University of Rochester, reviewed these studies and discovered that only 15 percent of them suggest that reducing class size improves student learning as measured by standardized tests.

Indeed, in 72 percent of the studies reviewed, there was no statistically significant effect on measurable student achievement associated with smaller classes. Even more surprisingly, in 13 percent of the studies reviewed, student test scores actually declined as class size was reduced. In sum,a full 85 percent of all of the studies on class size and student achievement found that reducing class size did not improve student performance. "

The study is flawed because the size of the class was only 23 per teacher. How much individual attention can you give to a class that size? I would think not very much.

Lets drop that down to 5 students per teacher and the teacher works with the students throughout the school day. Now, the teacher could give individual attention to each of the students. I would be certain that those students would do much better than those with 22 other students and 7 different teachers.

[Honolulu Blue]

Reading these comments has been very interesting. I don't agree with all of the opinions expressed here, but I don't have strong enough views to spark a debate on this topic.

What I would like to hear opinions on is the future of education. In the distant past, education was available only to the elite classes and those who were home schooled (or self-taught). Are we going back to that?

I'm not sure about other states, but in Michigan, public education is funded mainly through property taxes, sales taxes, and the lottery. Only the latter offers much choice of whether to opt in or not. Eventually home schooling parents and those who send their kids to private schools are going to figure out that a substantial portion of their taxes are going to support a crumbling public education system and does little to help their kids. So they're going to demand their money back - and I think they will eventually get it, at least a portion of it. So home schoolers and private schools do better, and public schools - under a double whammy from having less money and fewer bright students - do worse. And the worse public schools get, the more kids and money get yanked away from them. It could be in a couple of generations that we have a three-tiered education system - (1) elite private schools for those who can afford it, (2) some variation of home schooling for most children, and (3) public schools for the desperate and destitute.

Food for thought.

[Godzilla Blitz]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

Isn't parental involvement even more strongly correlated, though?

I haven't looked at the data in a few years, but my understanding then was that economic status was the most accurate predictor of good grades. I've heard rumblings that "attendance" correlates even more closely, but I haven't seen any data on it.

Given that you have virtually no influence over the current economic status of your students’ families, increasing parental involvement is often cited as one of the most effective strategies to improve academic performance. As others have mentioned here, I would agree it’s likely that the parents of home-schooled kids are highly involved in their kids’ educations, and this caring attitude would be a big factor why home-schooled kids do well.

Also, based purely on anecdotal evidence, I get the impression that parents considering home-schooling are usually very bright people. Given that a significant component of intelligence is hereditary, I would think that home-schooled kids are starting out with a better than average mind.

Originally Posted by Revrew

Just wanted to challenge the assumption that homeschooledd children typically come from a wealthier class. In my experience in the midwest, the opposite is true, especially as many of these families give up mom's job to homeschool.

Sorry, Revrew, I was vague in my post. When I meant "well-off", I was thinking of exactly the situation you are describing: the family is well-off enough that one parent can afford to not work. I meant to contrast this with low-income families where both parents must work.

[clintl]

Substitute teacher here...

I think parental involvement and one-on-one teaching are probably the two biggest reasons homeschooled students do better. Also, maintaining discipline is enormously less complicated.

Aside from that, let me give you the other end of the spectrum when it comes to parental involvement, since it might enlighten some here on the board about why it is completely an apples-and-oranges comparison to compare homeschooled students with public school students.

Earlier this year, I spent 3 1/2 weeks teaching 8th grade science. In one of my classes, I had a particularly disrespectful student who caused trouble throughout the school. The school was divided into villages, and at one of the village meetings I went to, the village leader went over a list of students she was concerned about for various reasons (some discipline, some academic, and some attendance). This particular student's name was on the list, and the village leader said, "We don't where he lives. We haven't been able to contact his mother at the address we have on file, and she is not working for the employer we have on record any more. He has indicated he lives somewhere else, but not where. At this point, we're not completely sure he has a home." Since making contact with the parent is one of the key methods of discipline, aside from the issues of the student's well-being, this presents all kinds of problems for the school for which there aren't any easy answers. There is no way you can compare a kid like this to someone whose parents have the ability and resources to homeschool. The support system just doesn't exist, and it's unrealistic to expect the school system to be able produce test scores from such a student equivalent to those of a student with constant one-on-one instruction from a parent highly motivated to see his or her child succeed.

[clintl]

Originally Posted by Bubba Wheels

This is why home-schooling, charter schools, private schools, ect... continue to explode in popularity and attendance across the country while traditional public schools continue to struggle in test scores and lose students in mass exodus' elsewhere (Detroit Public Schools, for instance). Parents it would seem want teachers to teach and not social engineer.

As for you, Bubba, did you even read the article? It was about PARENTS screwing up the school system by forcing teachers to not hold students accountable for cheating, and spineless administrators giving in to the parents. The teachers were doing the job they were supposed to be doing.

[ahbrady]

Originally Posted by thealmighty

<---high school teacher, Dallas.

Parent night, I have standing room only during my honors/Pre-AP sessions. In the regular sessions, I have 2 or 3 parents.

My thought is that if the child who does poorly would have grown up in a home with the honors parent, that child would be an honors student in the majority of cases. I see brains out the ass on most children, but many have no clue what to do with theirs, or to what end. Many of the most intelligent students I have ever had were heavy duty gang assholes or drug dealers, etc...

P.S.- this is not an indictment of those parents in toto, as many, I am sure, care and others, no doubt, have not been 'raised' in an educational environment for parents where they felt welcome/part of their childs education.

I've got to second this. I'm an Algebra/Geometry teacher at a private school. On our parent/teacher conference days most of my time is spent talking to parents of kids that are in the upper echelon of my classes. The parents that I need to talk to the most, the parents of kids that are failing or almost failing, usually don't show up. Parental involvement plays a HUGE role in the student's success in academics and everything else.

[Bubba Wheels]

Originally Posted by clintl

As for you, Bubba, did you even read the article? It was about PARENTS screwing up the school system by forcing teachers to not hold students accountable for cheating, and spineless administrators giving in to the parents. The teachers were doing the job they were supposed to be doing.

Malkin, rightfully, highlights the teachers attempts to do the right thing in the face of a SPINELESS SCHOOL SYSTEM attempting to appease angry parents by among other things inflating SELF ESTEEM over traditional education. Lots going on here, teachers are to be commended but the problem highlighted is still the education system going off-track.