Home Schooling

iguana

crayolastereo wrote: »

In work, you are separated by seniority of post, are bossed around by anyone and everyone and in careers like medicine, being humiliated by angry senior doctors is part of life, you have to learn to not let it get to you. Home-schooling is an idealized version of real life. Life is hard, people are mean, school prepares you for that.

Seniority of post has to do with capability and the job being done, age segregation makes no sense at all.

There is a very big difference between being reprimanded by a boss and a child being humiliated by an adult. While bosses may be nasty and do it in a humiliating fashion it is still adult to adult and can't be compared to adult to child.

I had a particularly horrible boss once. when she tried to bully me I moved as much of our correspondence as I could into written format so that I had it all chronicled. I also had outlets for my frustration, being able to talk to my husband, go for a drink and a bitching session with friends and (carefully) with co-workers, Krav-Maga, I looked through my notes from my previous job and reminded myself of how much both my boss and my boss's boss there had appreciated me. When I had enough of her attitude I got a new job and when HR had me complete a "leaving survey" I cited her, including written examples of her hypocrisy and bullying. I was able to make my own choices and live with them. I could put up with her while I did because it was my choice and when I no longer chose to I could choose to leave.

A child who is bullied by a teacher is powerless. They have no choice but to get up each morning and go to school. They can tell their parents but there is a very big chance their parents will erroneously compare it to an adult work environment and ultimately tell them to suck it up. Children are powerless when it comes to the decisions about their lives. Which is utterly crushing when they are in a bad environment.

Good home-schooling is actual real life. What is idealised about getting on with life in the actual world? About having to interact with people of all ages and in multiple posts to get what you want and need? It's what we all do all of the time.

implausible

Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion and has a right to educate his or her child in the way they see fit. However, I would worry about the motivation of a parent in home-schooling.

iguana wrote: »

I mostly hated school, I enjoyed the time I had with my friends, but I don't think it was the right learning environment for me. There were subjects that I loved such as science, but grew to hate due to uninspiring teachers.

If it's a choice based on the individual child's needs, the other educational options and sound academic studies, then great. I would have reservations though about a parent making that choice based on her own experience of school and negativity towards the teaching profession. Just because a parent had a negative experience of school doesn't mean the child will. Each child is an individual.

Truley

crayolastereo wrote: »

In work, you are separated by seniority of post, are bossed around by anyone and everyone and in careers like medicine, being humiliated by angry senior doctors is part of life, you have to learn to not let it get to you. Home-schooling is an idealized version of real life. Life is hard, people are mean, school prepares you for that.

One could argue that conventionally schooled children are more likely to resign themselves to confining environments and bullying people. Home-schooled children can realise that they shouldn't just blindly accept injustices and that there are always alternatives, the freedom to avoid oppressive structures.

cynder

iguana wrote: »

The biggest thing that would hold me back with regards to home-schooling is that if either one of us was ill again, like my husband has been, then a good school could provide a buffer from living with that.

I know 13 people who were home schooled and for only 1 of them things worked out.

My nephew is being home schooled by his terminally ill mother, she say" if he went to school he would bring back and infection that could kill me" . he is 9 and when she dies will have to go into mainstream school( because my brother cant teach him)which is is totally unprepared for.

His mother does not have the educational background to school him past primary school (very much doubt that will happen as she only has 3 years left). The last assessment that he had went fine and he was on par with others his age.

cynder

crayolastereo wrote: »

In work, you are separated by seniority of post, are bossed around by anyone and everyone and in careers like medicine, being humiliated by angry senior doctors is part of life, you have to learn to not let it get to you. Home-schooling is an idealized version of real life. Life is hard, people are mean, school prepares you for that.

Agree!

cynder

iguana wrote: »

Good home-schooling is actual real life. What is idealised about getting on with life in the actual world? About having to interact with people of all ages and in multiple posts to get what you want and need? It's what we all do all of the time.

I was told i had a old head on young shoulders, which i did and still do, but find it hard interact with people my own age, all because i was kept home from 5th class onwards. mom tired to home school us, didn't work.

Ayla

I think a lot of people still see HE as a parent sitting down with their child & a bunch of books all day Monday-Friday. In fact, from what I've found, the opposite is generally true. The learning is much more interactive and flexible, and is child-directed.

In other words, when the child notes an interest in a particular subject (ie: Egyptian history), then the parent uses that interest to learn all about it from different perspectives - geometry, history, government, social structures, agriculture, food, fashion...and to top it all off, once they learn about it, there's nothing stopping them from hopping on a plane & visiting the pyramid sites firsthand! That is something you just cannot get from sitting in a classroom with a number of students & 1 teacher.

And it must be said specifically - children who are homeschooled do not (generally) exist in a bubble. From the research that's out there (links on the Primary & Preschool thread), HE kids are much more interactive & active in the community (through volunteering, church, sports, music, etc) and wind up being much more involved in local issues/government as adults. This therefore seems to indicate that HE kids don't live outside the "real" world, nor are they social hermits that can't function in groups and/or society as a whole.

Obviously, the success and/or failure of HE boils down completely to the adult/child relationship & their mutual desire to do it together. There are good - and not so good - outcomes, but the same could be said for conventionally schooled children.

the_syco

IMO, there should be a interview type test that parents have to do before they can home school their children, to assess their mental health, their reasons for home schooling their kid, and to ensure that they have the knowledge to teach.

metrovelvet

the_syco wrote: »

IMO, there should be a interview type test that parents have to do before they can home school their children, to assess their mental health, their reasons for home schooling their kid, and to ensure that they have the knowledge to teach.

But you can get outside support too for the gaps in your own knowledge. Its not just the parents teaching.

I have a friend who was a competitive world champion ice skater and she had tutors her whole life until she went to third level.

the_syco

metrovelvet wrote: »

But you can get outside support too for the gaps in your own knowledge. Its not just the parents teaching.

I have a friend who was a competitive world champion ice skater and she had tutors her whole life until she went to third level.

Sorry, should have added knowledge to teach and look for information. But mainly on their mental health, and their reason for doing home-schooling.

Me, I'm glad I went to school. Learnt a lot, and learnt (after a few years of being bulied) not to take sh|t from anyone. Pretty much all of the bullying was done outside the school, so home schooling wouln't have helped that much, but being in school taught me how to make friends, and how to attack enemies.

If I ever have a kid, I'll ensure they do some sort of martial arts from a young age.

cynder

Ayla wrote: »

I think a lot of people still see HE as a parent sitting down with their child & a bunch of books all day Monday-Friday. In fact, from what I've found, the opposite is generally true. The learning is much more interactive and flexible, and is child-directed.

In other words, when the child notes an interest in a particular subject (ie: Egyptian history), then the parent uses that interest to learn all about it from different perspectives - geometry, history, government, social structures, agriculture, food, fashion...and to top it all off, once they learn about it, there's nothing stopping them from hopping on a plane & visiting the pyramid sites firsthand! That is something you just cannot get from sitting in a classroom with a number of students & 1 teacher.

And it must be said specifically - children who are homeschooled do not (generally) exist in a bubble. From the research that's out there (links on the Primary & Preschool thread), HE kids are much more interactive & active in the community (through volunteering, church, sports, music, etc) and wind up being much more involved in local issues/government as adults. This therefore seems to indicate that HE kids don't live outside the "real" world, nor are they social hermits that can't function in groups and/or society as a whole.

Obviously, the success and/or failure of HE boils down completely to the adult/child relationship & their mutual desire to do it together. There are good - and not so good - outcomes, but the same could be said for conventionally schooled children.

I'm taking my daughter to the pyramids in May next year (already booked) and she is at school (5th class), It depends how much a parent earns, if you have an unemployed parent teaching a child at home how can they afford to take their child to Egypt? where as if you have a rich parent who provides tutors for their child and can take time off work to take their child to Egypt all well n good. You cant turn round and say only well off parents can home school their child because they can take them to different countries.

Also i learned all about weeds as i was sent out in the pouring rain pulling them up, also i knew about car engines as i was outside drilling out spot weld to remove them. I could fish and lake lead weights for fishing, i could steer a 20ft boat, I could cook sunday roasts at 12, but i would have preferred to have gone to school because when i stepped out in the real world at 14(i started full time work at 14 (1994)) i wasn't prepared for it (girls are such bitches) and tried to kill myself at 15. I was no idiot because i went back to school at 22 and did the leaving cert applied and got a score of 196 out of 200. If id only been given the chance to go to school and get a proper education i wouldn't have had a problem with self worth and not feel inferior to everyone else. I would have been great at school. I missed out on a lot and i wouldn't recommend it to anyone.


From my experience all the 13 people i know who were home schooled lived in a bubble. Yes some of them found it hard to socialise others didn't. Each and every one is different and you don't know you have made the wrong decision until its too late. My own nephew lives in a bubble, between taking care of his sick mom and leaning about all of his 23+pets he receives little contact with kids his own age and is socially odd because of it, he doesn't know how to react around other kids, he is either to grown up (asking if you have washed your hands each time you leave the toilet,) or too immature (jumping round like an ape and making rude noises) his 9.

Each to their own.

Moonbeam

As parents it is our job to educate our kids.
My little one is only a 21 months old and is in creche so I don't get as much time with her as I would like but her whole world is about learning.
She learns about animals from books and mimics them,I take her to the zoo so that she can see them.She has a pet dog that she helps look after.
She learns songs and comes home and sings them for us which in some cases involves me having to google random words to find out what she is trying to sing,so we learn them and sing them and do the actions with her.
She has learned cause and effect and how to sequence basic things.
This is not much different from an older child learning in school for the best education parents need to be involved.
We don't really know anyone where we live so most of her socialising is in the creche and some more of it is in the playground.
I don't feel that I have the knowledge or experience to home school her but have choosen the school that she will go to carefully and I will keep up with what she is doing and where I can add to it.
I also feel it is important to learn to socialise with her peers and learn to deal with situations that will never arise at home but will equip her for life.
Her peers in school might not always who we wish them to be but this is live we pick our friends but not the people that we have to deal with daily.
She will learn about other cultures she will elarn about different ways of doing things and mammy will always be there to sort things out and pick up the pieces and fill any gaps in what she learns in school.
If we lived in a very rural area,she had special learning needs or was a sick child I would go educate myself now to deal with educating her at home on both the socia level and the academic level.

cynder

Moonbeam wrote: »

,she had special learning needs or was a sick child I would go educate myself now to deal with educating her at home on both the social level and the academic level.

I was in with the early intervention services today, working on an IDP (individual development plan) for my boy. They are signing me up for another course, i have done the 'Hanen More Than words' course and I am to do a behavioral course (as he has a few issues), his pre school assistant has volunteered to do the course with me, so we can both work with him, me at home and she will work with him at pre school.

Parents are primary educators in every day things, Why do you think most kids know their abc's and can count to 10 and know their colours before they start school. But schools go further and explore more areas, Ive never done science/chemistry/physics so how can i teach my child. I do know a bit about biology but not as much as they would learn from secondary school. Are parents going to sit their child through the discovery channel or the history channel or animal planet? Many families enjoy watching them together in the evening any way, we do.

Moonbeam

Dunno how I would deal with 2nd level I personally couldn't do it in the irish system.
We would probably have to do a levels and if her chosen subjects weren't our specialties then it wouldn't be possible with out an outside tutor!

Ayla

grindelwald wrote: »

...But schools go further and explore more areas, Ive never done science/chemistry/physics so how can i teach my child. I do know a bit about biology but not as much as they would learn from secondary school...

I have to disagree with this, mainly b/c my schooling (in the classroom) - and what I'd imagine most students experience - is from the book. It's dictated by some central education board & doesn't necessarily go into the depth or topics of interest to the individual student. For example, in math class, we'd spend the whole time watching the teacher working equations on the chalkboard, then we'd try to reproduce the same results by doing the questions on our own. The only individual attention we'd get was if we'd stay after & ask for specific help. As someone who always struggled with math I spent many an hour in tears over my math book trying to figure it out b/c I just didn't "get it."

This is an issue that would never arise in homeschooling, b/c the parent would be able to identify the difficulty before it ever became an problem.

My husband remembers in primary school (a one-room school that he shared with a grand total of about 15 kids), he tried to get the teacher to talk about planets b/c he'd already finished the "work" for the day, but the teacher couldn't be diverted from the teaching plans & had a number of other kids to cater to.

And the examples are endless... ever wonder why students are so excited if they finally manage to get the teacher off on a tangent? Possibly, it's because - for a short time - the teacher's not just "teaching" but actually "sharing" how information can be useful & exciting.

Grindelwald, it's obvious that your homeschooling experience was negative, and you seem to blame it for a lot of your current angst, all of which is quite regrettable. However, I really don't see how a single teacher with 30-odd kids can possibly challenge & encourage each student as personally as a home-educator could.

cynder

Ayla wrote: »

I have to disagree with this, mainly b/c my schooling (in the classroom) - and what I'd imagine most students experience - is from the book. It's dictated by some central education board & doesn't necessarily go into the depth or topics of interest to the individual student. For example, in math class, we'd spend the whole time watching the teacher working equations on the chalkboard, then we'd try to reproduce the same results by doing the questions on our own. The only individual attention we'd get was if we'd stay after & ask for specific help. As someone who always struggled with math I spent many an hour in tears over my math book trying to figure it out b/c I just didn't "get it."

This is an issue that would never arise in homeschooling, b/c the parent would be able to identify the difficulty before it ever became an problem.

My husband remembers in primary school (a one-room school that he shared with a grand total of about 15 kids), he tried to get the teacher to talk about planets b/c he'd already finished the "work" for the day, but the teacher couldn't be diverted from the teaching plans & had a number of other kids to cater to.

And the examples are endless... ever wonder why students are so excited if they finally manage to get the teacher off on a tangent? Possibly, it's because - for a short time - the teacher's not just "teaching" but actually "sharing" how information can be useful & exciting.

Grindelwald, it's obvious that your homeschooling experience was negative, and you seem to blame it for a lot of your current angst, all of which is quite regrettable. However, I really don't see how a single teacher with 30-odd kids can possibly challenge & encourage each student as personally as a home-educator could.

How does a parent teach a child something they dont know, they have to know it to teach it.

Are you just going to hand your child a book any say read that? or will you show examples say on a board???????? like in school!
Or will you tell them to look it up on the net, that way, are they not teaching themselves rather than you teaching them.

Why didn't your husband asks his parents about the planets when he got home?

I know my kids ask me questions.

I have no current angst i am very happy, i got myself an education something i was denied as a child. I think anyone who thinks teaching a child at home is the best way is living in la la land and perhaps it will take 20 years for the mistake to become apparent maybe sooner. It could even be the right choice for that child, if the parent puts every effort and resource in and hires a tutor when and where appropriate.

iguana

grindelwald wrote: »

But schools go further and explore more areas, Ive never done science/chemistry/physics so how can i teach my child. I do know a bit about biology but not as much as they would learn from secondary school.

On the otherhand I knew a huge amount about science as a young child. I was especially fascinated by astronomy and astrophysics. (Though genetics and chemistry were also interests.) I had piles of books and star-charts, a telescope, microscope and chemistry set. My encyclopaedia of science was one of my favourite books. I was starting to learn about the ancient Greek astronomers and mathematicians around the time I started secondary and was seriously eager to get to school and start formal math and science classes but boy were they a bust.

I knew a lot more about the areas I was interested in than we were taught. In fact much of the subjects were simplified to the point of being incorrect. We were actually told in junior cert science that there is no scientific formula to show how bees can fly!!!!!:eek: I was bored out of my skull and extremely frustrated to be learning things that were ultimately wrong. It was also deeply frustrating that math and science classes weren't coordinated as they are so clearly interlinked. (History too.) I also felt that if the subject I knew about were being taught incorrectly then there was a very good chance the subject I didn't know about weren't going to be accurate either.

After three years of that I loathed science. It went from being the subject I was most eager about going into secondary school to being the one I couldn't wait to drop the most. From 8-13 it was a great passion, by 15 I couldn't stand it so much I had almost no interest in it for another 15 years. It's been such a joy in the last couple of years to regain that interest but I'm DAMN angry to have lost so much time with it. Often in the evenings that I'm home alone I try to teach myself complex math so I can learn to understand the math behind the science because as it stands now I only understand the story. (I'm basically the Korean student in A Serious Man.) I was better at this 20 years ago than I am now. Quite a few people I know had similar experiences.

Maybe because the subjects aren't of interest to you, you aren't aware that much of what is taught in schools is wrong. Actually, really, really wrong. Repeatedly throughout school I came up against things in my two favourite subjects that I knew to be wrong in History and Science and when I'd ask the teachers about it, it was clear they didn't even know that what they were teaching was wrong. I have a very real problem with the fact that schools are misinforming children through carelessness and that teachers have so little interest in what they are teaching that they don't even know that they are misinformed themselves. Parents assume what is taught in schools is at least based on fact because they aren't informed about the subjects but too often that's not the case. I have no interest in sending any children I may have into such an environment. I want them to learn and learn how to keep learning.

Ayla

grindelwald wrote: »

How does a parent teach a child something they dont know, they have to know it to teach it.

Are you just going to hand your child a book any say read that? or will you show examples say on a board???????? like in school!
Or will you tell them to look it up on the net, that way, are they not teaching themselves rather than you teaching them..

Wow, it is that impossible to conceive of the idea that parents & kids can learn simulataneously? Why would it be a bad thing that a parent recognizes their limitations, knows they don't know everything, then take an active interest in learning alongside their child? If anything, I think this gives a strong message to the child that learning really can be a lifelong pursuit and not just something to be drilled to pass the next exam!

grindelwald wrote: »

Why didn't your husband asks his parents about the planets when he got home?

I know my kids ask me questions.

Well, without going into unneccessary detail, I suppose it's fair to say that my husband's parents would not have known any information, nor would they have felt particuarly interested in learning it.

grindelwald wrote: »

I have no current angst i am very happy, i got myself an education something i was denied as a child. I think anyone who thinks teaching a child at home is the best way is living in la la land and perhaps it will take 20 years for the mistake to become apparent maybe sooner...

This is my point - you hold a lot of resentment toward the way you were taught - or how you felt you were not taught. And maybe HE wasn't the right choice for you at the time. But it did give you the drive to increase your education later in life completely on your own initiative. It's all hypothetical to speculate what you would or wouldn't have been if you had gone to a classroom setting.

cynder

Ayla wrote: »

Wow, it is that impossible to conceive of the idea that parents & kids can learn simulataneously? Why would it be a bad thing that a parent recognizes their limitations, knows they don't know everything, then take an active interest in learning alongside their child? If anything, I think this gives a strong message to the child that learning really can be a lifelong pursuit and not just something to be drilled to pass the next exam!





This is my point - you hold a lot of resentment toward the way you were taught - or how you felt you were not taught. And maybe HE wasn't the right choice for you at the time. But it did give you the drive to increase your education later in life completely on your own initiative. It's all hypothetical to speculate what you would or wouldn't have been if you had gone to a classroom setting.

So who is teaching, no one!!!!!! It will be like here's a book learn, oh and i will try and learn too because here i am teaching you and i dont have a clue.



Yes i would have been dam good at school (if i can go back and do the lca at 22 and get top marks and only having a level of 5th class education all others in my class has J.C and scored way less than me). Im not stupid I never was, I didn't have the piece of paper to prove it. Who would hire someone with only primary school education in this day and age, that was ok for those back in the 1960's. I find your post very patronising(maybe not your intent but thats how i picked it up). I was only taught for less than 3 months, then it faded into nothing, we had no education only from own experiences and TV. I only had the level of education of someone in 5th class, i was good at math but at 11 i could only teach myself so much. I did get a gcse math book of another girl who was home schooled and i was able to do most of that.

I loved school, I loved learning, I was good if not v.good at school work. HE was not for me and as i see it not for any of the other 13 people i know who were home schooled.

Also its not resentment its that i hate to see other kids have their education threw away with the lovely thought of homeschooling. I think about my nephew and think poor thing, he will have a hugh wall to climb when she dies.

cynder

iguana wrote: »

On the otherhand I knew a huge amount about science as a young child. I was especially fascinated by astronomy and astrophysics. (Though genetics and chemistry were also interests.) I had piles of books and star-charts, a telescope, microscope and chemistry set. My encyclopaedia of science was one of my favourite books. I was starting to learn about the ancient Greek astronomers and mathematicians around the time I started secondary and was seriously eager to get to school and start formal math and science classes but boy were they a bust.

I knew a lot more about the areas I was interested in than we were taught. In fact much of the subjects were simplified to the point of being incorrect. We were actually told in junior cert science that there is no scientific formula to show how bees can fly!!!!!:eek: I was bored out of my skull and extremely frustrated to be learning things that were ultimately wrong. It was also deeply frustrating that math and science classes weren't coordinated as they are so clearly interlinked. (History too.) I also felt that if the subject I knew about were being taught incorrectly then there was a very good chance the subject I didn't know about weren't going to be accurate either.

After three years of that I loathed science. It went from being the subject I was most eager about going into secondary school to being the one I couldn't wait to drop the most. From 8-13 it was a great passion, by 15 I couldn't stand it so much I had almost no interest in it for another 15 years. It's been such a joy in the last couple of years to regain that interest but I'm DAMN angry to have lost so much time with it. Often in the evenings that I'm home alone I try to teach myself complex math so I can learn to understand the math behind the science because as it stands now I only understand the story. (I'm basically the Korean student in A Serious Man.) I was better at this 20 years ago than I am now. Quite a few people I know had similar experiences.

Maybe because the subjects aren't of interest to you, you aren't aware that much of what is taught in schools is wrong. Actually, really, really wrong. Repeatedly throughout school I came up against things in my two favourite subjects that I knew to be wrong in History and Science and when I'd ask the teachers about it, it was clear they didn't even know that what they were teaching was wrong. I have a very real problem with the fact that schools are misinforming children through carelessness and that teachers have so little interest in what they are teaching that they don't even know that they are misinformed themselves. Parents assume what is taught in schools is at least based on fact because they aren't informed about the subjects but too often that's not the case. I have no interest in sending any children I may have into such an environment. I want them to learn and learn how to keep learning.

If you liked it that much and were super intelligent why did you not pursue it in college where info is abundant. They are secondary school teachers not professors. Do you think your parents had to knowledge to fulfill your scientific needs, would they have been able to come up with a scientific formula to show how bees can fly? Do you think your parents could have taught you all you needed to know about science? Do you think you would have made any progress if you parents were teaching you? Would you have been better taught by a tutor who had a degree/masters/PhD in science? (and how much would that have cost?)

Would home schooling have been a better option for you at 12/13? why? what resources would you have needed? Would your parents have been up to the job or would they have had to hire someone?

Present time - i haven't seen that film but why don't you do an open university course to try and get a better grasp of complex math.


Also wasn't it taught in school that Pluto was a planet and now with further investigations it now not classed as a planet. Mistakes happen.

coffee_cake

grindelwald wrote: »

If you liked it that much and were super intelligent why did you not pursue it in college where info is abundant.

:rolleyes:
Because years of demotivation really sink into a child, that's why.
And if that's what it was like in school why suppose, as a child, that uni would be any different?

Do you think your parents had to knowledge to fulfill your scientific needs, would they have been able to come up with a scientific formula to show how bees can fly?

To say "I don't know let's find out" would have been far more accurate than a trained professional saying "that's impossible".

I am not a parent but after a little disillusion with the current education system I'm fascinated by it. I think I would strongly consider home schooling any child I had who was "outside the norm". It's possible to supplement the education after school (if you have the time and energy ofc) but if they are strongly demotivated IN school all day every day, that can be damaging.
There are enough social networks out there specifically set up for homeschooling that children of parents who genuinely want the best education for them will do well, imo.

iguana

grindelwald wrote: »

Do you think your parents had to knowledge to fulfill your scientific needs, would they have been able to come up with a scientific formula to show how bees can fly?

Are you missing my point on purpose? I already knew that before I went to secondary school. My parents had no need to teach me that at 14 I knew it beforehand. I assume my uncle probably explained it to me and gave me the book I read about it in, though my dad has certainly always had a passing interest in the laws of motion so it could have been sparked off by him. Then I got to school and the science teacher repeated a common misconception, oft put forward by those of a creationist bent to discredit science, as fact. I ended up keeping my mouth shut because I had already learned how badly most teachers take it when a pupil knows something relevant to their subject that they don't.

Humans tend to have a innate desire to learn and learn well. Home-educating (and Montessori) isn't about teaching a child but about guiding their ability to learn. It's about giving them the tools and the freedom to really sink their teeth into the subjects that fascinate them and then using that to find the path that will lead them into an interest in the subjects which may not have sparked their imagination. Ie, when a child is interested in history you can use that to ignite their interest in math, politics, social sciences, scientific discovery, trade and economics, etc. It isn't about you knowing something and imparting that knowledge, it's about interest and discovery.

As for why I didn't study science at third level, as I have already explained, I hated the subject by the time I completed junior cert. I had lost my interest in it. There was no way I would have studied it for two more years in school and 4 more (minimum) in university. I switched over to Art for my Leaving. It's only in the last few years I've rediscovered that interest.

Ayla

iguana wrote: »

Humans tend to have a innate desire to learn and learn well. Home-educating (and Montessori) isn't about teaching a child but about guiding their ability to learn. It's about giving them the tools and the freedom to really sink their teeth into the subjects that fascinate them and then using that to find the path that will lead them into an interest in the subjects which may not have sparked their imagination. Ie, when a child is interested in history you can use that to ignite their interest in math, politics, social sciences, scientific discovery, trade and economics, etc. It isn't about you knowing something and imparting that knowledge, it's about interest and discovery.

Yes! Well said! But maybe some people would just think that's just too "lala world" :rolleyes:

iguana

Ayla wrote: »

Yes! Well said! But maybe some people would just think that's just too "lala world" :rolleyes:

That makes me think of this lecture on what motivates people in the workplace. I think it's the same basic principle.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc

cynder

Ayla wrote: »

Yes! Well said! But maybe some people would just think that's just too "lala world" :rolleyes:

As if us parents who send our kids to school don't already do that, can't be telling me only home schooled kids get that from their parents. :rolleyes:


Do you think we just dump our kids at the school gate?

My lady loves horses I don't have a clue she spends 9 hours a week at the equestrian centre and only has 1 hour of riding. Do you think I'm gonna let her quit school so she can focus on horses, not a bloody hope. But she can stay there and learn from the trainers. She even gets jobs to do and takes people on treks all this on top of her schooling.

helm09

Not sure about idea of home schooling, mine really benefit from being in a class and interacting with other kids, learning how to make friends, deal with the bad guys and generally learning how to cope on their own which is what they will have to do eventually, it's all about learning life skills.

cynder

iguana wrote: »

I already knew that before I went to secondary school. My parents had no need to teach me that at 14 I knew it beforehand. I assume my uncle probably explained it to me and gave me the book I read about it in, though my dad has certainly always had a passing interest in the laws of motion so it could have been sparked off by him. Then I got to school and the science teacher repeated a common misconception, oft put forward by those of a creationist bent to discredit science, as fact. I ended up keeping my mouth shut because I had already learned how badly most teachers take it when a pupil knows something relevant to their subject that they don't.

.

So you knew all the ins and outs of science at 12, there was nothing the teachers or your parents could teach you? wow, why are you here in ireland and not at NASA?

You skipped these:
Do you think your parents could have taught you all you needed to know about science? Do you think you would have made any progress if you parents were teaching you? Would you have been better taught by a tutor who had a degree/masters/PhD in science? (and how much would that have cost?)

Would home schooling have been a better option for you at 12/13? why? what resources would you have needed? Would your parents have been up to the job or would they have had to hire someone?




You would have benefited from home schooling, why?

the_syco

Ayla wrote: »

This is an issue that would never arise in homeschooling, b/c the parent would be able to identify the difficulty before it ever became an problem.

But only if the parent knew how to explain it. Skipping it is not an option. In most cases, you need to be able to show how you got X from V to the power of Y divided by Z to the square root of B.

Ayla wrote: »

And the examples are endless... ever wonder why students are so excited if they finally manage to get the teacher off on a tangent? Possibly, it's because - for a short time - the teacher's not just "teaching" but actually "sharing" how information can be useful & exciting.

Nope. It's because it stops the teacher teaching. Often we'd go so far off topic, we'd start talking about anything but the subject.

=-=

My respect of history was given to me by some teacher called Mr Brodrick, Excellent history teacher. Had a few useless teachers, one of which walked around wearing sandels (this is pretty much as good as naming him, if you went to Colaiste Chiaran).

grindelwald wrote: »

I was only taught for less than 3 months

And because you were taught for less than 3 months, everyone else who does the full 7 years can't be doing it right? Your logic is not great.

grindelwald wrote: »

I think about my nephew and think poor thing, he will have a hugh wall to climb when she dies.

I agree. And I still think anyone who plans on home schools should be interviewed on why. The boys mother sounds like a fruitcake.

iguana wrote: »

u6XAPnuFjJc

That was friggin cool.

iguana

grindelwald wrote: »

So you knew all the ins and outs of science at 12, there was nothing the teachers or your parents could teach you? wow, why are you here in ireland and not at NASA?

What's with the passive aggressive sarcasm? Do you have a problem with children who know a lot about things they are interested in? Maybe because you keep on missing the point of what I'm saying in a way that must only be wilfully obtuse. There was lots more to learn about science when I went to school (quite obviously :rolleyes:) but the way it is taught, simplified to a point where it is not only extremely boring but often wrong. There was not only nothing for me to sink my teeth into and keep me interested but debate was stifled. Knowing something the teacher didn't was a fast route to getting in to trouble. Being able to do equations in my head got me into trouble, anything that was off-curriculum was forbidden but what was on the curriculum was inadequate.

grindelwald wrote: »

You skipped these:
Do you think your parents could have taught you all you needed to know about science? Do you think you would have made any progress if you parents were teaching you? Would you have been better taught by a tutor who had a degree/masters/PhD in science? (and how much would that have cost?)

No I didn't. You keep on missing the point. That's not what actual learning is about. It isn't about being 'taught' it's about discovery. It doesn't really matter what the 'teacher' knows as long as they have the ability to help you find out and learn for yourself.

grindelwald wrote: »

Would home schooling have been a better option for you at 12/13? why? what resources would you have needed? Would your parents have been up to the job or would they have had to hire someone?
You would have benefited from home schooling, why?

Such a better option it's not even funny. I learned nothing in school that I didn't already know apart from how to coast and be bored. Past first class, school was a massive negative influence in my life. I already had everything I needed in order to learn. I had books, a library card, scientific paraphernalia and a love of learning. I was always doing projects of my own instead of school work anyway. My parents could have helped me when necessary but at that age I would rarely have needed them. One of my mother's brothers was a great influence on me with regards to science and one of my father's brothers with regards to history, both from when I was a very small child. I learned far, far more from either of them than I did from any secondary school teacher.

If I'd had access to online information of the sort we have today and hadn't had to fill too many hours doing mind-numbing busywork the teachers gave us I might have been able to negate some of the damage. But I don't know, boring someone for hours on end each day for no discernible purpose has a long-lasting impact.

cynder

the_syco wrote: »

And because you were taught for less than 3 months, everyone else who does the full 7 years can't be doing it right? Your logic is not great.


.

Didnt say that, ' i was saying where I had a lack of home schooling' in no way was i comparing that to someone who does a full 7 years.

12 of the the kids i knew who were home schooled from day one until they left home (18 years+) or got a job or got pregnant.

Yes i agree home schooling should be regulated and that parents motives should be checked out. It should be done in the best interest of the child and not the parent (as in my nephews case). Yes she is a fruitcake, and not a tasty one.....