Click here to go to the NEW College Discussion Forum

It seems that a significant portion of homeschool families take that approach not because of a drive for academic excellence, but because they don't want their kids exposed to topics like sex education, because they want to promote creationist beliefs, or because don't want their kids associating with the broad spectrum of social elements one finds in a typical public school.

These families seem to be mostly from a fundamentalist Christian background. Are there large numbers of homeschoolers from other religious backgrounds, i.e., Catholic, mainstream Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, etc.?

By California Mom (Calmom) on Monday, October 22, 2001 - 01:30 am: Edit

I don't know the numbers, but there is a large segment of homeschoolers who are not religious, but are simply dissatisfied with the school system in their communities.

Many are parents of highly gifted children or of children with special needs, learning differences, or attention deficit or behavior issues. These are kids who for one reason or another don't fit well within a traditional school environment.

It is typical for these parents to initially engage in some sort of tug-of-war with the school trying to get special support, accommodation, or acceleration for their kids. They become dissatisfied with the red tape of the school or unfulfilled promises, and sometimes their kids are also suffering emotionally because of personality conflicts with the teacher or bullying at the hands of other kids.

So for many, the solution to the not-fitting-in problem is homeschooling. Many such families are mixed - there may be a group of siblings where some are homeschooled and others attend regular school programs.

Again, I don't know the numbers, just that there is a substantial movement for homeschooling among these groups. Teachers and school administrators sometimes push these families towards homeschooling, by telling the parent directly that the school cannot adequately provide for their child's needs.

By Nathan (Homeschool) on Monday, October 22, 2001 - 12:25 pm: Edit

Wow, that was a great post, Calmom! Right on the money, in fact. I know very few homeschool families who left due to religious conflict with the public school system. Most homeschoolers I know, including myself, fit your description of the situation.

Poorboy, sounds like you equate "Christian fundamentalists" with something outside the realm of Protestant/Catholic beliefs. Nothing could be further from the truth. Several of the Protestant denominations have very conservative doctrines. These "fundamentalists" you speak of tend to gravitate towards those mainstream denominations that offer conservative teachings, like Baptists.

By California Mom (Calmom) on Monday, October 22, 2001 - 09:49 pm: Edit

I also do know some Christian homeschoolers, too!

The one Christian homeschooling family that I know particularly well are ordinary people who take their religion seriously, and purchase their curriculum material from a Christian-oriented publisher. But the children participate in other activities with families from all religions and backgrounds -- in fact, that's how I have come to know them so well. The kids are intelligent, polite, charming and self-assured. We don't discuss religion or politics, but I don't see these kids as being sheltered or isolated; they are simply home schooled.

I really don't think you can generalize. Many deeply religious people do homeschool because they disagree with the content of a secular education, but there are also many private religious schools available to fill the need of an alternative, religious-oriented curriclulum. I thnk that issues like class size, quality of academics, and school safety are bigger factors in most parents' minds than educational content. In fact, I think its important to keep in mind that there are many excellent private Christian schools around, but often the home-schoolers don't feel comfortable with the religious school enviromment either. It's a very individualized choice.

By Dadster on Friday, November 30, 2001 - 09:23 am: Edit

I was at the dentist's office and found an old Time Magazine that had a cover story on home schooling. (What, you were expecting the current issue? I think there are special dental office supply companies that sell them out of date, beat-up magazines by the pound. ) Anyway, the article cited a Florida survey that showed that fewer than 30% of home schoolers cited religion as a reason for their decision. Another survey cited in the same article showed a somewhat higher %, more like 40%, who mentioned religious beliefs.

By Nathan (Homeschool) on Friday, November 30, 2001 - 10:07 am: Edit

That is an interesting statistic. The mention of “Florida survey” makes me wonder whether the survey was only statewide, or on a national scale. Florida has one of the worst elementary and secondary education programs in the country. I’d be surprised if it was a national survey, as those numbers seem slightly low to me.

By Dadster on Tuesday, December 04, 2001 - 09:42 am: Edit

I'm pretty sure the survey with the lower statistic was restricted to Florida residents. I'd post a link to the article, but Time now charges for archived material.

It would make sense that the religious influence on homeschooling in Florida would be below the national average if the public schools are as bad as you describe. I'm sure the elderly are a huge political influence there, which usually means bad things for school funding.

By Rhonda on Friday, December 14, 2001 - 09:15 am: Edit

A recent issue of The Atlantic had a lengthy book review about a book focusing on homeschooling, and in part on the trend of fundamentalist Christians to homeschool. One thing it said that at least I had not heard before is that homeschooling was a way for the fundamentalist Christian women to feel useful and do something productive, since many of them don't believe it is appropriate to work outside the home. Not saying this is true or not, I really don't know. THe only homeschoolers I know are conservative, religious fundamentalists, and I don't know their homeschooling practices well enough to be able to comment on them.

By formerly homeschooled on Friday, December 14, 2001 - 11:17 am: Edit

Not all parents who homeschool fit the sterotype. I received a large percentage of my education through homeschooling, and my mother classififed herself as a liberal for the longest time... I however, happen to be the exact opposite of her. (conservative, etc)

By Nathan (Homeschool) on Friday, December 14, 2001 - 04:41 pm: Edit

I’ve heard of the article Rhonda, but haven’t read it myself. You really can’t stereotype or categorize homeschoolers. My mother, while a stay at home person for now, is college-educated and is not the religious type you speak of. I really don’t know any barefoot and in the kitchen moms that homeschool their kids. In fact, many of the mothers where I live have set aside their jobs/careers in order to teach their children at home. I don’t see homeschooling as an effort by fundamentalist men to keep their wives placated and busy.

By Sam on Sunday, December 16, 2001 - 07:52 pm: Edit

"barefoot & in the kitchen moms" - maybe we should move this to the "islamic" thread, sounds like the Taliban (if they had kitchens).

By xxx on Wednesday, January 02, 2002 - 04:58 pm: Edit

You are thinking of the "barefoot & in the cave" concept... ;)

By paula griffin on Sunday, September 08, 2002 - 02:35 am: Edit

I am from Florida and ALL of the people that I know that homeschool are fundamentalists (Southern Baptist). Did you forget Florida is in the South and in the bible belt? Well my brother is a Fundamentalist Southern Baptist and his wife is homeschooling their girls. The rest of the fmaily is in total disagreement with it and it is causeing MAJOR problems. If Florida is so bad as far as the schools go then it doesnt say much for the homeschooling the girls are getting. They both had to go to public school last yr because their mother mysteriously got "sick" (they loved it and did well) and they both were behind and one of the girls had to be put back a grade. The mother shows favortism to one of the girls and the other one will not get the same attention in teaching as her sister will. I HATE HOMESCHOOLING. Paula

By Alira on Tuesday, February 18, 2003 - 06:36 pm: Edit

I was homeschooled for a year, loved it, went back only because my mom figured I should go to high school. My mom thought that most homeschoolers were fundamentalists, but when I showed her a Pagan Homeschooling site she was more reassured! (She's not Pagan, she's Buddhist, but things associated with Fundamentalism scare her off and things associated with open-mindedness and liberal-ness reassure her.) In the immortal (Ha!) words of Buffy Summers, from Buffy the Vampire Slayer,

"How about Homeschooling? You know, it's not just for scary religious people anymore."

By Morgantruce (Morgantruce) on Sunday, May 18, 2003 - 08:01 am: Edit

Our two daughters were homeschooled K-12. In their college applications, they made it abundantly clear that they did NOT home school for religious reasons. They applied to, and were accepted by, top tier liberal arts colleges.

It seems obvious to me that "mainstream colleges" and "religious colleges" do not share the exact same view of what the ideal applicant is.

I think colleges have an interest in knowing if an applicant filters all knowledge through the confines of one book.

The United States constitution equally protects atheists, agnostics, believers, and fanatics. It is our right to associate or distance ourselves from any of these groups. We can also keep silent about our choices---which is probably what I should do!

By Parentofteen (Parentofteen) on Friday, August 29, 2003 - 02:03 pm: Edit

Although my children are in public school, I help tutor homeschooled children in my county. Unfortunately, I am seeing that the majority of my homeschooled students are not being challenged enough by their main teachers: their parents.

Many of them homeschool to avoid the violence and bad influences found in public schools or due to fundamentalist religious beliefs. However, it seems that many families opt to homeschool as a means to "taking the easy way out." Their kids do as little as possible in the way of schoolwork and never have any serious projects or deadlines to meet. Therefore, the family can vacation year round and claim that the trip was wholly educational. There is little to no stress over grades because Mom will let you retake a test or help you with it in order to get that A to report to the state.

The biggest down side of all is that many parents are failing their children by sheltering them from a better education, not only about books, but also about learning to cope with different people and hearing diverse ideas. There is a real world out there, and public school truly helps prepare one for it.

Of course, do not take offense to this if you are one of the families that homeschools in a more serious manner. I am aware that many kids with learning disabilities, behavioral problems, or extreme genius capabilities do receive greater benefit from learning at home than in a larger setting. It's just that in my area I have yet to meet a family whose kids seem to fall into those categories.

Anyone else share my concerns with homeschooling?

By Innotof (Innotof) on Friday, August 29, 2003 - 11:48 pm: Edit

Parentofteen, I totally agree with you. Having been homeschooled since kindergarten, I've met quite a few other homeschoolers who seem to take the "easy way" out of school (i.e., not giving grades, still doing pre-algebra in 9th grade, not looking ahead to college admissions, etc.). When I was 10 or 11, I decided I wanted to try for a very selective university, so I've avoided (by default, perhaps) falling into the traps in which so many homeschoolers fail to find themselves. For example, I've been researching how to conduct AP courses at home for the past three or so years. It wasn't until this past week that I finally met a homeschooler who is also looking for ways to do AP classes! I also find it hard to believe that other homeschoolers can receivea quality education with only three hours of schoolwork per day while I will have well over 10 hours each day this coming year. I don't intend to go on and on about the educational mistakes of some homeschoolers, nor do I wish to sound like a braggart when it comes to speaking of my own education. While I understand that a lot of people don't have the same goals I do, it annoys me to see the poor quality of what some homeschoolers consider to be high school. The general public (at least those people in favor of homeschooling) point to the winners of the National Geography Bee and the Scripps-Howard National Spelling Bee as examples of how wonderfully motivated and intelligent homeschoolers are. In my personal experience, though, these students are quite an exception to the norm. That isn't to say that homeschoolers are stupid; they're average kids who have greater opportunities available to them (in my opinion), but many don't take full advantage of those opportunities.

By Jamimom (Jamimom) on Monday, September 01, 2003 - 12:19 pm: Edit

I don't think this site has caught on with most homeschoolers. So it is difficult to say how these families feel, what they are doing for highschool homeschooling by reading this site. I do have some concerns about homeschooling highschoolers who may want to go on to a highly selective college.
I was close to a cluster of homeschooling families who were also religious. They did an outstanding job educating their children through 8th grade. At that point, I would say their kids were the envy of many of us struggling with our schools and issues such as peer pressure, outside elements, controversial subjects. The home schooled kids tended to dominate the music competitions, get the best drama roles, and were just downright excellent in every extracurricular endeavor as well as being smart, well educated kids. Their test scores were high, and they did all sorts of wonderful out of school things from community service, to travel, to cultural programs.
I took my child out of school in middleschool out of sheer desperation and had a miserable year homeschooling, nagging, threatening, pleading, praying. Several years of slowly falling in the percentile ranks of the standardized tests, the final straw was an acute downslide in 7th grade putting him in the lower 30th percentile. His grades were never good, his school work haphazard, and though his teachers complained none offered any workable solutions. In one year he was up in the 90-99 percentile, could write a decent essay, pass a highschool level grammar and reading comprehension test,and was a year ahead of his class in math. It nearly killed me. He had an ok 8th grade year, but I could see him sliding, but his out of orbit test scores and extra curricular talents in music and sports got in into an exclusive private school that turned him down flat twice before. He finished there as a slightly above average student with good but not terrific SATs and ended up in a highly selective college with a nice group of schools to choose from. Without doubt that year of homeschooling benefited him.
But homeschooling in highschool is a different story. I watched my children start to surpass the homeschooled kids easily in highschool. They memorized sonnets but did not know the literary terms to critique them.. They had read classics for years but did not know thematic discussions. They could not do second year algebra or trig problems and calculus excaped them entirely. Their history knowledge was clumped into areas that they studied. The real shocker was where most of these kids who were so far ahead of my children in grammar school, ended up taking community college courses in junior year, learned even less and did not go on to any selective schools at all. Their SAT 1 and 2 scores were all shocking low. Many of them were cheating themselves by not thoroughly doing their correspondence courses and the parents were weary or too busy with younger kids to check them. I remember I had to check every little thing when I homeschooled my child and it was a long, tedious experience--no 2-3 hours a day. It was all day, everyday before I got him to put out. Alot of these homeschool kids had earned their parents' trust by doing so well in elem school programs and so they were not so carefully watched. And kids will be kids. So they don't do 20 trig problems, they get it after 3 reps. But they don't really get it and nobody catches it. They write essays that would have gotten them C's or D's in a college prep class and mom and dad can't accurately assess it. College prep is such a different story. When they take the college boards, it all catches up to them and they have no transcript to show another side of the story. When you are homeschooled you need 3 SAT 2s and the test scores count much more heavily than when you have a school report and recs behind you. The colleges are very skeptical of recs from correspondence schools.
Not to say I have not met a few successful homeschooling families. But they are very few. One family has sent one child to Harvard and another to U of Pitt( honors--Chancellor's Scholarship). They obviously knew what they were doing. But too many end up in local, open admission schools with a collection of community college credits and a vague sense they missed the boat only they don' know quite how and when. How did that terrible pianist or violinist from those early years make all-state in highschool and go on to get a music scholarship? How did that dumb jock end up ivy ? How could that horrible public highschool make those transformations? and why didn't the homeschool group blossom as drastically?
I write this as a friend of a homeschooling mom whose very talented, bright 17 year old just got her college boards that tell her otherwise. She was all set for ivy. But now what to do? I spent a few days with her and questioned her repeatedly with things that my middle of the class kids in highschool know like the back of their hands. She knew little. She could not do algebra or geometry problems that my 9th grader whips through and she supposedly took the subjects in 6th and 7th grade. She supposedly is taking calc. but could not beging to do the problems I showed her from my son's old calc book. And he was a C math student. He still scored high on the math boards and passed the calc and precalc screening tests at a very math oriented college. (He did not appreciate that-had to fulfill his math requirement with an upper leverl calc course)
So she has lowered her college sights, and is enrolled in a bunch of comm college courses,as well as working with the KOBE program to get her high school degree. She won't be going ivy and somehow, somewhere the music petered out too. She still gets private lessons but isn't considered such hot stuff anymore. Her brother going into his first year of high school correspondence courses is as well prepared as any 8th grader. But he is a skilled athlete with no real outlet, the makeshift church league is just not going to do it. And he is not as disciplined as his sister was. I don't see how he will get competence in his college prep unless the parents really get on the stick, and frankly, I don't think they are capable. I don't think I am capable.
So these are my thoughts on this subject.

By Magenta (Magenta) on Tuesday, September 02, 2003 - 08:20 pm: Edit

Jamimom brings up a bunch of interesting points (as usual!). As our son was homeschooled prior to college, I'll go ahead and chime in here. I will ramble because my public high school education didn't teach me how to write better. ;) I'll hope to touch on Jamimom's points somewhere here.

First, the homeschool groups we joined were only ones which let all people in no matter their religion (or in our case, lack thereof). Just as I didn't question them with, "If God created everyone, who created God?", they didn't try to tell me that our son would go straight to hell if he died because we never baptized him (we felt *he* should decide what religion, if any, he wishes to be, and he's researched a number to date and currently feels Taoism fits him best, but isn't a fanatic here). We all got along fine even though some were no doubt religious. The Christian homeschool groups could have been different, not sure, but they seemed nice on the days where I saw them bowling (the bowling alley had homeschool days open to all homeschoolers, not just certain homeschool groups).

I couldn't quite follow when Jamimom's child was in traditional school versus homeschool, but am sorry the experience was trying for you and your child. Our experience overall was good, but it could be because I decided it best to can the canned curriculum (we used Calvert for K-4) and let our son just learn on his own as he far more enjoyed that method and whatever we did using the canned method was mostly old news to him (the one exception being history). My guess is if there was nagging, threatening, pleading, etc. going on, there was a formal curriculum being used (i.e. school at home more with traditional textbooks and papers rather than "unschooling" or schooling that is child centered but not to the point of unschooling), but correct me if I am wrong there.

Now to the subject matter in high school. I can believe many homeschoolers did not know the literary terms to critique sonnets - I likely don't myself and trust me, I don't feel any worse off. I also haven't done a calculus problem in over 20 years and couldn't do one if my entire family's life depended on it, but my guess is it never will. I am guessing many homeschoolers don't know these things because they don't feel them worthy to know for the individual people they are. We as a society are very into "basics" which are in actuality well beyond what is basic (as calculus is NOT basic math - not a soul needs it to be doing finances, purchasing homes and cars, etc....software will do even the balancing of checkbooks and helping to select the wisest mortgage today). Yes, to get into an Ivy college, homeschoolers very well would be wise to know the subjects a college will expect them to know at least enough to get in and do well there, but many homeschoolers really no DO NOT wish to attend Ivy schools (for one, many realize the pay off is not what so many think financially as how one does in life is far more linked to factors like intellect, self-motivation, social skills, even having a loyal spouse than what college one attended so long as the intellectual level being compared is approximately the same). But those who do have an *edge* at many tops schools. Stanford accepts homeschoolers at TWICE the rate of private and public school applicants, but they are likely the college seeking homeschoolers the most currently.

It is shocking to me to hear the homeschooled kids you know had shockingly low scores on the SAT I and II. Overall (as in nationally), homeschoolers do better than traditionally educated students on the SAT I - haven't heard research on the SAT II. According to http://www.gomilpitas.com/homeschooling/olderkids/CollegeTests.htm

"In 2001, homeschooled SAT-takers had higher scores than the SAT-taking population as a whole, with homeschooled students averaging 568 on the verbal test (out of a possible 800) and 525 on the math, compared with 506 verbal and 514 math for the national average of all SAT test-takers."

They also have slightly higher ACT scores; according to the same site, the average ACT score for schoolers was 22.5 versus 20.8 for all test takers there.

I like in an SAT oriented part of the nation, and the umbrella group around where we live has an SAT score average in the 1200's, but we live in an area of very educated parents with likely more opportunities for educating children than many other areas (one homeschool family whose son went to the state university likely did so because his father was the provost at this large state U and the tuition would be free, plus it had a very strong department in the kid's area of interest, an area the father was the dean of prior to becoming provost).

And while Jamimom knows of very few homeschool success stories, I know of quite a few. The most wild is likely that of Sho Yano, who was homeschooled prior to starting college at age 9, graduated at age 12 with all A's and one B, scored all 13 and 14's on the MCAT (that means a score of 40 or 41, and for those who don't know it, Harvard Medical School - number one med school in the country - has an average of 34 to 36 [forgot exactly, but I know it's in that ballpark]), had a perfect score on analytical and math sections, and is now (still age 12) in one of the country's most prestigious Ph.D./M.D. programs (at University of Chicago) on a full ride. Now, he is far from a typical kid (while some tester scored him in the low 200's or something, I assure you the kid should have scored more like 300 as he not only keeps up with kids twice his age, like someone with a 200 IQ could do, but hangs in the 99th percentile with kids twice his age). However, there are lots of homeschool success stories out there - I read them all the time but they just don't usually stick in my head and so I can't site more right now.

I'll try to write more (as if I haven't written enough, I know!) after dinner, and maybe look up some other homeschool success stories to post.

By Texas137 (Texas137) on Tuesday, September 02, 2003 - 09:30 pm: Edit

Lots of homeschooler success stories in the math/science olympiads.

By Magenta (Magenta) on Tuesday, September 02, 2003 - 09:44 pm: Edit

Okay, I am back with some more.

From http://www.edu-cyberpg.com/culdesac/homeschool.html

"Ryan Abradi, of Maine by age 10 was working his way through second-year college calculus. Caitlin Stern of Haines, Alaska, became a recognized expert by studying bald eagles in the wild. Jedediah Purdy from West Virginia, graduated summa cum laude from Harvard University; in 1996 he was selected as a Truman Scholar and as West Virginia's nominee for the Rhodes Scholarship. He then went on to Yale Law School and, in the meantime, wrote a best selling book."

Now I grant you the first one doesn't impress me much as our son took college calculus at 9 (the university wanted him to start at 8 based on his math SAT score at 8, but we didn't see the need) and had the whole college math major sequence up through linear algebra and calc III honors finished at 11. The second example, though, I think shows how being allowed to study in depth in just various areas of interest from early on can be beneficial. And the third is the class example of what today's society considers "success" (and while he didn't get the Rhodes Scholarship, I am pretty sure I read of a number who did last year).

At the bottom of this site is:

"Cornell University study confirmed this and showed that schooled children become "peer dependent" while those who learned with their parents have more self-confidence, optimism, and courage to explore.
- Moore Foundation study of children of parents who had been arrested for truancy
found that their homeschooled children ranked 30 percent higher on standard tests than the average classroom child.
- UCLA project showed that the average schooled student receives 7 minutes of personal attention a day but the selflearner receives from 100 to 300 minutes
of attention daily.
- Smithsonian Report on genius concluded that high achievement was a result of
time with responsive parents, little time with peers, and considerable time for free exploration.
- Time Magazine reported that "the average home schooler's SAT score is 1100, 80 points higher than the average score for the general population."
- Dr. Lawrence M. Rudner, conducted a study in 1998 that included 20,760
students in 11,930 families. He found that in every subject and at every grade level
(K-12), homeschool students scored significantly higher than their public and private school counterparts. Some 25 percent of all homeschool students at that time were enrolled at a grade level or more beyond that indicated by their age. According to the study, the average eighth-grade homeschooler was performing four grade levels above the national average. The average ACT score was 21 out of a possible 36 for public schooled children. It averaged 23 for self-learners. This qualifies the average college-bound self-learner for the most prestigious universities."

http://www.auburn.edu/administration/univrel/news/archive/01_03news/01_03blackmar.html

The above link tells the story of a homeschooled gal who became a Marshall Scholar (second in prestige only to the Rhodes).

http://www.athomeinamerica.com/Article_4YearStudy.mv

The above (if I typed it right) is on a U of Michigan study that notes that of the 53 homeschooled adults they located (average age of 32), 15% had completed a graduate degree (well higher than the national average; nationally, only 26% have a college degree or higher and I think somewhere around 8-10% have a graduate degree, but look that up to be sure) and nearly 2/3 were self-employed and only a few of them along as crafts people or other solitary jobs where most either provided employment to others or worked along with family members. How many people in the nation are self-employed? Of those, how many are female (as about 3/4 of those in this study were female)? I wish they had broken down how many were actually employing family members versus self-employed and working along with them - our son has since he was around 3 said he would be employing most everyone in the family someday, and when he turned 7, my brother (who has degrees in medicine, physics, and two in engineering) said, "This photo of him looks like Bill Gates. Someday, we will all be working for him. Don't laugh; I'm serious." I still don't see the whole family working for our son, if any of us, but I did find that article interesting.

Back to Jamimom's post, she notes that when it comes time for the college boards, it all catches up to them. Again, I really don't think it does, from the research I have read (rather than a story from people who are observing with their own eyes only, and I am not saying Jamimom's observations are off for wherever she happens to be residing, but that this "catching up to them" notion does NOT appear to be the norm). Our son scored higher at age 8 than the average at the local state U (a state U which currently has SAT scores in the 1200's) and was admitted at 8 (though we didn't allow him to start till 9) and has a scholarship. It's true that he never formally took a correspondence or other course in geometry, trig, or algebra II...never did formal problems in those either...just read "The Easy Way" (talk about taking the easy way out) books on geometry and trig (nothing for algebra II) without doing the problems when he was 6 or 7 and somehow that was enough for him to score higher than about 90% of high school seniors on his math SAT at age 8 (a test he took without test prep beyond taking a computer software test and then a paper test for practice at home) and place into calculus on the college placement test (a test which we were told about 10% of those with 700+ math SAT scores and high AP calculus scores do NOT place into calculus on). We were very wary about letting our son just jump into calculus without those other math subjects under his belt formally, but he got the A in calculus (he was noted as being one of the top students in the class) and has continued to do well in math (and in discrete structures, a computer science class that is really a math class, he had the high grade on the final with NO studying whatsoever where other kids claimed they were studying like mad and indeed, were in the halls cramming right up till the door opened for the exam). He also has had either the top or second to the top test grades in geography, honors intro and adolescent psychology, pre-med biology (a class where over 300 registered), music appreciation, etc. -some classes like German and French, the teachers don't post the range and it's unknown whether our son was ever the high score on a test or the final course grade, but I have a guess that he was in these courses, too). As for English, he used the CLEP to get the freshman credit and will take an upper level English instead to meet the Honors College requirement here. He wrote like an adult from age 7 or earlier, so I'd be rather surprised if essays were ever a problem for him (and he won two computers - grand prize in a national contest he entered at age 7, and $300 in US Savings Bonds at age 6 in a national essay contest for 4th-7th graders, and a scholarship for a computer camp at age 7 and was asked to write for a high school paper at age 7...this isn't just *my* opinion but that of many others here). His honors psychology professor told me after the course was over that he found it funny in retrospect that he had told our son privately at the start of the class that if he needed help with his writing, to just come see him since the course had essay exam questions and research papers, and then after having our son and seeing his writing, he said, "Ha, what a joke! I should have *him* giving *me* writing lessons!"

And rather interesting (shocking, truly) to me was how our son at age 7 took a Culturescope test for high school seniors and scored higher than most high school seniors as this test isn't just about the "basics" of science, math, English/literature, art, and history, but also has questions on sports and movie classics and stuff our son had relatively little exposure to at age 7 (I felt). So even if he couldn't do all some high school seniors could do (without first getting exposed to how to do it somewhere), he certainly seemed to be doing okay.

But as with Sho, I realize our son is a tad unusual with how quickly he picks up things and thus not a good representative for ALL homeschooled kids, but I still don't think most homeschooled kids have issues in writing, math, etc. like Jamimom thinks. One homeschooled friend of our son's scored a perfect 800 on the math SAT I at age 10 and did it again at 11 along with scoring a perfect 800 on the SAT II math at that age (and yes, he also got a scholarship and finished his math degree at age 16 and his physics degree days after turning 17 and is in a physics doctoral program at one of the top programs in the country now). I know of another homeschooler who scored a perfect 1600 on the SAT (though I am thinking she was more like 16 or 17 than 10 or 11). She is in Linda Dobson's book on successful homeschoolers.

As for the 17 year old girl who couldn't do algebra and geometry problems despite having studied it in 6th and 7th grade, that really doesn't surprise me *that* much. People often quickly forget math they aren't using and this gal apparently had perhaps 5 or more years to forget those subjects. The GRE math is easier than the SAT math, did you know that? Know why? Because after 4 years of college, most people know LESS math than they did going in, or do it less well or both. The verbal GRE, in contrast, is harder than the verbal SAT (I know of a guy who easily scored in the 700's on the SAT verbal and couldn't even crack 500 on the GRE verbal no matter how much he studied, though I grant you that much of a discrepancy also seems odd to me as our son took a practice GRE at 11 and had no trouble scoring well over 500 verbal, though I grant he had scored well higher still on the SAT verbal).

As for being capable of teaching highschool, I really suspect the best situation here is when students don't *need* a teacher at that level - that they can just read a book (or lab manual or whatever) and figure stuff out on their own. But again, not all students are interested and/or able to do that.

By Magenta (Magenta) on Tuesday, September 02, 2003 - 09:48 pm: Edit

Texas, the success stories in the math/science olympiads doesn't surprise me. The guy I mentioned above who scored the 800 math on the SAT I at age 10 had a perfect score in the Math Olmpiad for several years in a row, including a year where I think just 17 people had a perfect score (now, LOTS do and I suspect lots of cheating as I have heard of teachers helping the kids to try to get their schools to look better by having winners, which homeschoolers could do, too, if the people giving the tests aren't ethical; this kid we know was tested by the director of a math institute for gifted math students who was also a college math teacher and he went on to do very well at college level math competitions).

By Apollos (Apollos) on Tuesday, September 23, 2003 - 08:40 pm: Edit

4th grader in college work...so what! Who cares if a couple of kids pass some ridiculous GED test and start junior college early. Life is not simply academic. It is being aware that some people have higher IQ, some are more athletic, some swear and curse and disturb others, some lie, cheat and steal. Some instructors (just like at college) are boring and some demanding, some just don't care. This is life. By withdrawing from your public schools homeschoolers, you have decided your only responsibility is to your immediate family. You know if you put the time it takes to do a good job home schooling into your local public schools, then your efforts would increase their yield a hundred fold.

I have three (3) daughters all GATE-identified, IQ Tests avg just under 140(performed by child psychologist)and with the exception of private school (Challenger Schools in South Bay) for the oldest for a couple of years, they have always been in public school. The oldest has participated in the International Baccalaureate program, which I think exceeds the level of instruction by the average high school educated home schooling parents by ten times.

I agree that most home schoolers are not Christians because I know no home schooling parent can look at the children in their struggling neighborhood school, look at their WWJD bumper sticker, and then turn away because of fear for their own children. What an example that would be to their "Christ-like" children of complacency. Or perhaps they feel that the persecution of American public school exceeds the Roman arena.

I know several home schoolers in my Southern Baptist church, and most watch more TV than my public school kids (actully we no longer have a TV, not because of some weird act, but because of lack of use). The homeschooled kids usually have seen more PG-13 (at 10 years old), and R-rated (at age 13 years old) movies than my kids.

Lastly, e-mail me if you would like to have your kids sit down with mine and perform a full subject SAT II test against my public schoolers. Grades are 3rd, 4th, and 9th. (Don't forget foreign language for the older one.) Meanwhile, they have brought somewhere near 35 kids (between them all) to church (not just VBS), how many have you reached in your home school? My kids will go to college on time (Lord willing), not a day early, but when they get there they won't be blown away by competing ideas, differing viewpoints, and the idea that they are not the center of attention. They won'y expect that every program was designed just for them.

By Magenta (Magenta) on Tuesday, September 23, 2003 - 10:20 pm: Edit

> 4th grader in college work...so what! Who cares if a couple of kids pass some ridiculous GED test and start junior college early.

Our son never had to take a GED; he had to take an SAT and the college placement tests and he was never at a junior college (other than at ages 5 through 8 for Kids on Campus classes for fun, that is), only a 4 year university.

> Life is not simply academic. It is being aware that some people have higher IQ, some are more athletic, some swear and curse and disturb others, some lie, cheat and steal. Some instructors (just like at college) are boring and some demanding, some just don't care. This is life.

I never said any of the above wasn't true. It's not like one needs to attend public school to know this. Clearly, though, you need to homeschool awhile to understand what homeschoolers know here.

> By withdrawing from your public schools

We never withdrew as we were never in the public schools. Our son's pediatrician (whose children have attended and two still attend our county public schools) urged us to homeschool our son at the 18th month check-up due to his already reading, knowing much world geography, etc. just from observation (no formal training like flashcards or phonics lessons).

> you have decided your only responsibility is to your immediate family.

Wrong again. Our son was the top fundraiser in the state for Multiple Sclerosis all three years he was in their read-a-thon (and he only stopped to give other kids a chance to win first place); not too many 7 year olds have raised over $4,300 for a cause (not many adults have either, unfortunately), and this wasn't with ME making phone calls or going to businesses or his using his parents' coworkers to ask for sponsorship (like so many public school kids' fundraising seems to be). He also volunteered to read to tiny tots in the library when he was 7, and felt some senior citizens might like to be read to by kids and suggested in a letter to the library such a program but when they never moved on it, he volunteered his own services at the local retirement home following giving a handchime choir concert there. Since age 7, he has visited the same residents there (other than the two who have died, one of whom he was asked to give a eulogy for and did)...reading to them, playing instruments for them, sharing photos and just chatting. He's gone to the hospital every Christmas Eve since he was about 5 to give new wrapped books to the kids. He designed sympathy cards for the family members of 9-11 victims and used them along with the addresses for these families and stamped envelopes in a fundraiser on campus to raise money for the Sept. 11th fund. He helps tutor other college students in calculus and computer science and more. He studied the food problems of the world and gave a presentation at a global food conference in Germany. I could go on, but to say that our son (or I, who drives him or flies with him on his many missions here) feels that our immediate family is our only responsibility is garbage that shouldn't be put in the recycle bin. What we *are* saying is that immediate family is our *primary* responsibility and we make no apologies for that.

> You know if you put the time it takes to do a good job home schooling into your local public schools, then your efforts would increase their yield a hundred fold.

I fail to see the reason that public schools should be where I devote my limited time and resources as opposed to say raising money for the American Cancer Society, doing volunteer work for performing arts (which my husband and son also have also done, by the way), or a host of other causes. We can't all be all things to all people and just as you likely aren't devoting time to AIDS and Planned Parenthood and ALS is nothing to be held against you, my not devoting my time to the public schools should not be held against me.

> I have three (3) daughters all GATE-identified, IQ Tests avg just under 140(performed by child psychologist)and with the exception of private school (Challenger Schools in South Bay) for the oldest for a couple of years, they have always been in public school.

Glad it has worked for them. I love to hear happy stories, seriously. Not sure if you realize this, but there is a difference in how a person with a 140 IQ (BS tests and a Ph.D. specialist in gifted adults put me higher, by the way, and I don't even consider myself "gifted") and one with an IQ around double that figure learn, both in speed and method. Or maybe you didn't know just how high IQ scores for children go, as my brother (an M.D.) didn't till our son hit the scene. Do you honestly believe Sho Yano, for example, who scored 40 or 41 on the MCAT at age 12 when the average for HARVARD Medical School students is around 34 or 35 should have been taught in a public school before he entered college at age 9? If so, we will simply have to agree to disagree on the point of when public education makes sense and when it likely does not.

> The oldest has participated in the International Baccalaureate program, which I think exceeds the level of instruction by the average high school educated home schooling parents by ten times.

And you are naturally again entitled to your opinion. I can tell you that many IB educated students no doubt attended school with Sho Yano and he no doubt walked all over them with his 3.9+ (just one B) GPA, and he did his BS (literally BS if you ask me, but that's another topic) degree in 3 years and not the 4 or more most IB students take today even with all their nice transfer credits from AP tests.

> I agree that most home schoolers are not Christians because I know no home schooling parent can look at the children in their struggling neighborhood school, look at their WWJD bumper sticker, and then turn away because of fear for their own children.

Actually most homeschoolers still ARE Christians and while you might differ on what is a Christian, God will sort you all out when the time comes.

> I know several home schoolers in my Southern Baptist church, and most watch more TV than my public school kids

God, I love these anecdotes people throw around about "homeschoolers they know" that goes counter to ALL research ever done on the topic, research done by traditionally schooler researchers *wanting* to find something bad about homeschoolers. For starters, you can view http://www.hslda.org/docs/study/ray1997/18.asp
Now find me one study that shows that homeschoolers *in general* watch more TV than public school kids, even including the educational tapes and History Channel and other such viewing that is quite common for homeschoolers. I'm sure you Baptist Church is full of nice people, but to think they represent the norm for the country here would be faulty.

> The homeschooled kids usually have seen more PG-13 (at 10 years old), and R-rated (at age 13 years old) movies than my kids.

Well, I was public schooled and saw R rated movies at age 9. I don't feel any the worse for it, even though we have sheltered our son a bit more here (he was nearly 12 when he saw his first R rated film, and this was at a professor's home and a full year after another professor invited our son to an R rated film feeling our son mentally way beyond age 21, which according to tests of both intellect and emotional maturity, was true at age 8). But I doubt that I could represent *most* public schooled people anymore than our son or your Baptist Church homeschoolers could represent the *general* homeschooler here again. For the sake of discussion, though, let's say these homeschoolers you know *are* representative - wouldn't that mean homeschoolers are LESS sheltered than public schooled kids, at least in this one way?

> Lastly, e-mail me if you would like to have your kids sit down with mine and perform a full subject SAT II test against my public schoolers.

There would be little reason for my son to take the time to take an SAT II of any kind at this point (MIT admissions spoke to him several times about going there, and had he done so, THEN he'd have had good reason to take them, but not to try to prove a point to some stranger online). He tested out of freshman English and was writing for a high school paper (at the editor's suggestion) at age 7 and for an online tech site by a $500K MIT-Lemelson Award winner (that's the largest cash prize for inventors in the world, in case you aren't familiar with it) since he was 9 and won two new computers in a national essay contest at age 7 and $300 in US Savings Bonds in another at age 6 and has had a professor say after reading our son's blue book essays that our son could teach HIM a few things about writing, which rather amazed him as our son was 10 at the time and he was thinking he might need writing help. So I sort of doubt our son would have a hard time with the SAT II writing (oh, his SAT I verbal score was also higher than the average college bound high school seniors at age 8; he took a practice SAT at age 10 to see how much he'd improved and he scored in the top 5th percentile at that point).

As for the SAT II biology, our son attends a university that when he took pre-med bio at age 9, had more students in the freshman Harvard Medical School class from his university than any other except Harvard itself, and our son was ranked 3rd in a class where over 300 registered (plus, the other section had another 200+ students and not a one had a higher score than our son) and he never took notes nor studied and was competing against people who really cared about their grade (our son really didn't, so long as he passed and was learning) like the 26 year old Ph.D. who was in the class to take what she needed to take the MCAT and get her M.D. (she studied her tush off and never scored as well as our son on any test). And if our son had known he could take it honors, he would have been ranked first in the class, as the tests were exactly the same it was just discussion was given a higher weight in the honors sections and our son had a 100% discussion grade.

Moving onto the SAT II languages, our son was one of the top students in his German classes and his French class in college (again, never taking notes or studying - never even writing down the dates of quizzes and tests). They come very easily to him and if he didn't ace such SAT IIs, I'd be rather surprised, saying he had the level of the language the tests require (which for French, I would suspect he hasn't as he's only had the equivalent of a year of high school French). He's also had classes in Italian and Spanish outside of college when he was younger and time and again, teachers would comment that he should be in college as he was learning so much faster than the other kids or in the case of one German that he took before taking it in college, faster than the adults as that was an adult education class for travelers to Germany.

As for the math SAT II, he's already had calc III and linear algebra and is in differential equations and an upper level prob and stat right now. I don't think the math SAT II would be something most public schooled kids would score higher on, though I suspect some might as this is an area where he does make quick and sloppy mistakes at times (even though he wasn't making them at age before about age 8, even with doing stuff like logs and anti logs and factorials and simultaneous equations with two variables in his head at age 5). Whether your kids would be some of the kids who could beat him here, I don't know (though I can say odds are probably against it). Luckily, I also don't care how your children compare to my own. I can say, though, that one of our son's friends was homeschooled till he started college at 11 and he scored a perfect 800 on the math SAT at age 10 and a perfect 800 on the math SAT II at age 11. He is in a physics doctoral program at one of the top physics departments in the country right now at all of age 17.

And I could go on with other SAT II topics, but am not going to waste more of *my* time here.

> Meanwhile, they have brought somewhere near 35 kids (between them all) to church (not just VBS), how many have you reached in your home school?

Perhaps you missed that I am agnostic and don't attend church? Nor do I care how many kids you "save" as I'm unconvinced that they are being saved at all. I can say my son has touched MANY people. You should see photos with him and people around him...they are all smiles as they are looking at our son, not even knowing a camera is on them. Professors send him emails and handwritten letters telling him what a "JOY" (all in caps in the letter from one) he is and begging him to take another class with them or to change majors or add their subject as a minor. He got at least three job offers in 3 months at the age of 8. Lots of people like to spend time with him. The Honors College director's wife (who met our son on an Honors College trip to France) comes onto campus once a week just to spend time having lunch and chatting with our son, going to art exhibits, etc. Kids he has just met invite him to their birthday parties and to movies and out to dinner, a whale watch, etc. One of the seniors at the retirement home recommended our son (not her quite gifted and talented grandchildren, but our son) for a TV show on amazing kids (which was a waste of a vote as I told the station we don't like doing such TV shows, but it was a nice gesture on this woman's part all the same). Venture capitalists invite our son on their boats (one even invited our son to sail in a national sailboat regatta and the two came in second place) and to swing dance and to dinner and ice cream with their families. Some might think this is all people wanting to take advantage of our son, but I know these people, and at least for the ones I have mentioned here, it just doesn't seem to be so. Our son has a great smile and laugh and it rubs off on others. He doesn't need to take them to church to bring happiness into their lives, I don't feel.

> but when they get there they won't be blown away by competing ideas, differing viewpoints, and the idea that they are not the center of attention.

Our son is often the center of attention, I grant, but not always. He goes once a year to a gathering of other what they now term "profoundly gifted" children and he could care less that he isn't the center of attention there. As for being blown away by competing ideas, our son has had a very enriched life with far more competing ideas than most public schooled kids his age, of THAT there is no doubt (to anyone who knows him and his diverse reading and diverse experiences in the real world, from doing internships to world travel to book discussions with very diverse but all well educated adults to playing in the pool with a mentally retarded girl to Lord forbid, even seeing an R rated film!). He's also not just dealing with outdated textbooks, but getting cutting edge competing ideas at things like a conference with tons of people tops in all sorts of fields (from textiles to physics to movie directing to running the world's largest companies, etc. - tickets run $4K each now, but they gave us all free entry just to hear our son speak, lucky dogs that we have been). My differing viewpoint is that the notion of public schooled kids having access to more differing viewpoints than homeschooled kids and/or kids who start college early is the same sort of nonsense of years past when people thought homeschooling wouldn't be up to snuff academically and then when that was proven to be wrong, couldn't be as good for them socially (also proven wrong time and again by researchers who are either double blind - i.e. don't know which kids are which during their observation - or WANT to find something wrong with homeschooling to support their own *wrong* thesis but then come up with data that can't support those theories. Oh, and while public schools all have kids from a rather small radius (which doesn't make the best of different viewpoints and competing ideas), our son's university has students from over 90 countries last I heard. He also has plans for next summer to visit Vietnam, Hong Kong, China, Japan, Russia, Korea, and some other countries with rather divergent views from most American public or private schools (and this will likely include visits not just to factories to observe business operations in these places, but to some elementary schools and colleges).

> They won'y expect that every program was designed just for them.

And there is the REAL shame you are missing. Every program SHOULD be designed just for them; even the public school laws demand a fitting education for each INDIVIDUAL. We are not cookie cutter cookies and it shouldn't just be people labeled ADHD or whatever who get individualization via an IEP. Homeschooling lets kids know they need not just be one of a pack and usually with less dough spent than the cookie cutter public schools. Some people like living in cookie cutter homes (I live in one myself as I found one I love) and that's fine, but there is nothing immoral about someone with the ability designing a home just for them. Nor is there any crime in designing a form of education just for you (or for your child to design one just for him or her). But you like to think it is, and again, that's okay. We're all entitled to our own opinions.

By Apollos (Apollos) on Wednesday, September 24, 2003 - 01:06 am: Edit

Magenta:

Hat's off to a brilliant response! So when your son's eyes are old and gray he can look back on the great inventions and perhaps the new technologies he has produced for the world consumption machine to enjoy...at least for 10-15 years when their obsolesence is realized. Wow, won't he be glad he had an early start!

You don't seem to understand that the only things that really count in this world have nothing to do with academic education, but everything to do with people. My brother-in-law was home-schooled and is brilliant by most standards. However, he cannot accept the corporate structures he encounters in the business place because he does not know how to deal with "the rest of society". He is all to aware of his personal comfort, and at the very unfortunate expense of my wife's sister. My brother (a vice president for Nations/Bank of America) and his wife home school their three boys and daughter. I would venture to say they do not understand not being the center of attention at nearly every family function. Even my parents have commented on this.

Yet, assuming the issue were purely academic, you my internet acquaintance are one of a very few exceptions. To tout the accomplishments of a handful of the brightest home schoolers' accomplishments against Oakland, Watts, and Brooklyn public schools is a poor practice. Adjust the sampling appropriately socio-economically, and compare with only highly involved public school parents and you will likely see that on average there really is little or no difference.

You write regarding anecdotal comments related to the apparent deficiencies of home schooling "that goes counter to ALL research ever done on the topic, research done by traditionally schooler researchers *wanting* to find something bad about homeschoolers". I suggest that any "research" at this juncture is flawed and skewed. The problem with "research" is that homeschoolers are not categorically required to be tested. So only the ones with successful cases such as yours are motivated to do the testing. Further, only in the last 10-15 years has home-schooling really started to take off as an "alternative" education with the kinds of numbers required for more dependable findings. It is likely that, at the inception of the home-schooling movement, more "purists" were involved. But as the movement becomes more socially acceptable, then the type of parents "following the crowd" will begin to normalize the sampling.

Lastly, I have not found my children's public school education to be "cookie cutter." But while you say "...Nor is there any crime in designing a form of education just for you" you fail to recognize that most districts are now providing funding to home-schoolers for Karate, piano, and soccer to compensate for the inadequacy of home-schoolers at meeting these needs. Further, our district provided "free of cost" tutors and persons to correct homework. But these services ARE NOT free of cost.

The crime lies in that the economy of scale related to larger groups of students is lost, and that adversely impacts the students, whom for whatever reason cannot have the option of home-schooling. I would like a study to compare the amount of taxes paid by home-schoolers against the amount of services they receive. I believe the audit will reveal the "crime" in diverting resources disproportionately to the already socially advantaged (having good parents) few.

Note: You state "our son" a lot in your dissertation, yet seem to find no value in "anecdotal" evidence. Isn't it really about "our children"? Are genetics and physical address the only way we consider a child "our children"? I can sincerely state that when I read your post I was really excited to read of how well your child has performed. I would like it if all children could have parents like you, but some just don't and I believe it is our responsibility to reach out to those children.

By Magenta (Magenta) on Wednesday, September 24, 2003 - 10:45 am: Edit

> So when your son's eyes are old and gray he can look back on the great inventions and perhaps the new technologies he has produced for the world consumption machine to enjoy...at least for 10-15 years when their obsolesence is realized.

I am rather confident inventions going obsolete in short order (and 10-15 years might be generous in the tech world today, though his one mentor's inventions from as long as about 30 years ago are still in use, just updated) won't bother our son. If something he designs helps even one person for a short time, he will feel it worth the while taken.

> Wow, won't he be glad he had an early start!

You really don't get it. It's not about getting an early start. It's about being comfortable with who you are and where you are. The notion that all kids should amuse themselves while other kids go over the same material again and again that they picked up on their own ages prior just so everyone is learning with their chronological peers is ridiculous. Just as there should be no snears at people who have to repeat a grade so they can work with material again until they master it, there should be no snears for people who pick up things quickly and move at a faster pace. This isn't about a race; it's about accepting diversity rather than trying to shoehorn people into what is convenient for the mass education.

> You don't seem to understand that the only things that really count in this world have nothing to do with academic education, but everything to do with people.

First, the above statement at first struck me as true but is in fact false. If people had no academics, many people would be suffering in all sorts of ways from disease to not having airbags in their cars (something which saved the lives of my father and step-mother over the weekend), so academics DOES count in this world. However, people are what count the most and indeed the reason people study academics in large part (some study academics just for the shear fun of learning, but most also do so to apply the learning for the good of others).

And our son also gets how important people are. he has MORE contact with a more diverse group of people than the large majority of public schooled kids his age. He is constantly getting comments on how he is incredibly social and gets along well with people of all ages. For example, he has done an internship the past three summers at a tech company where he spends his work day hours with mostly people like himself (white, intellectually rather sharp, middle-class or higher) only middle aged and older and with college degrees (I think most have Ph.D.s, actually, other than an Intel STS finalist who is now a Harvard student, an artist in marketing, the director of marketing, the receptionist, and perhaps the accountant and a handful of others). But then he comes back to the hotel where the diversity is rather great. There are newborns through very senior senior citizens. Some are very rich (like a Canadian who is the CFO of a large company with offices also in the USA) and some rather poor (like this African American family from the south who use the hotel pool and barbeques for their massive family reunions with the other half of the family who lives in the area). Some are very well educated (like an MIT professor), some not at all academically minded (like construction workers who never went to college), some very creative (like these documentary producers from LA who wanted to do a film on our son, which we naturally declined), some with issues like Asperger's (a hospital nearby has a camp for these children, so the families often stay at this hotel) and mental retardation, some with conditions like MS (at least three men fell into that category) and ALS (and our son saw how technology helps that man to live), some who are housewives accompanying their husbands on business, and on the list goes. Our son was invited to do things with many of these people (go to movies, out to breakfast, out to dinner, to a whale watch, to a one-year old's birthday party, to a three year old's house to play, to a senior citizen's suite to chat, to a 10 year old's room to play Risk, etc.) because he *does* "get people" and gets along well with them.

> My brother-in-law was home-schooled and is brilliant by most standards. However, he cannot accept the corporate structures he encounters in the business place because he does not know how to deal with "the rest of society".

Yes, and this is *never* a problem for traditionally schooled people (choke). My brother was traditionally schooled, is brilliant by the standards of anyone I've heard comment on his intellect (which is most everyone who meets him), and has rather crummy social skills. His being academically strong has allowed him, *despite* his social deficiencies, to always have a well paying job and to build a large contemporary custom home on a 3 acre wooded lot (that's expensive around here, though cheap in some areas of the country), and drive his Mercedes (stuff that is important to him, not to me; I think we are in the top 5% in networth in this country and could easily afford to get a Mercedes, big house, etc. but have instead saved for things like seeing the world, going to plays and concerts, being able to invest in a business our son starts if ever he starts one and we feel it worth investing in, etc.).

> Yet, assuming the issue were purely academic, you my internet acquaintance are one of a very few exceptions.

No, read the thread above as I am pretty sure we've already covered how homeschoolers go to college and graduate school more (not just go, but GRADUATE), have higher college GPAs than traditionally schooled students, have higher scores on the SAT and ACT and every other standardized test thrown at them (and in some states, this can't be just the smart ones opting to be tested as the tests are *required* for *all* homeschoolers; in our state, the standardized testing is optional and our son never took the public school tests as we didn't think it made sense to him to take a test so far below his academic level - they only allow tested based on chronological age in this state - or to skew the results and make public schooled kids look bad when our son had exposure to things these other kids his age hadn't yet). Academically, homeschooled kids ARE doing better than even private schooled kids as a group. You can't find one shread of *research* to support the opposite. Try. Seriously.

> To tout the accomplishments of a handful of the brightest home schoolers' accomplishments against Oakland, Watts, and Brooklyn public schools is a poor practice.

And again, I have time and again noted that I realize my son and his friends and others we know are *not* the typical homeschooled kids which is why I *also* give the websites to show what the *general* situation is.

> Adjust the sampling appropriately socio-economically, and compare with only highly involved public school parents and you will likely see that on average there really is little or no difference.

First, the research *has* compared based on socio-economic level, parents education level, and more and again and again, homeschoolers come out on top. I can't say I have seen research on "highly involved public schooled parents" versus homeschooling families, but if you can find some research to support your case here, I'm open to see it. My guess is going to be that you will be incorrect in your guess as even the most involved parents of public schooled kids still have kids who have a teacher to student ratio far less kind to the student than homeschooled kids, and in learning, it is often about the time spent one-on-one or even on one's own rather than having to wait in line to get food, water, etc. and wasting time one often does not waste in the real world outside of school (with some big corporate exceptions - Microsoft, NIST, and some other companies do have lines in the cafeteria, but not for bathrooms and water fountains).

Have to run, but will try to respond to the rest of your thoughts later. Thanks for sharing. I love seeing what goes through people's heads.

By Emptynester (Emptynester) on Wednesday, September 24, 2003 - 05:35 pm: Edit

"I would like it if all children could have parents like you, but some just don't and I believe it is our responsibility to reach out to those children."

many homeschool families do reach out to those children, but in my experience tend to wait until AFTER they have finished raising their own when they have more time to give to volunteer work. It is not necessary to do everything in life all at once and taking time off to concentrate on one's own family doesn't necessarily mean one has no concern for the community at large.

By Magenta (Magenta) on Wednesday, September 24, 2003 - 09:58 pm: Edit

Okay, I finally have some time to write again and finish responding to the earlier post.

> I suggest that any "research" at this juncture is flawed and skewed. The problem with "research" is that homeschoolers are not categorically required to be tested. So only the ones with successful cases such as yours are motivated to do the testing.

As I noted earlier today, our son was actually *not* given standardized tests that were used in any homeschool versus traditional school research (unless his SAT scores were used for that purpose somehow, which I guess they might have been), and the reason is that we saw no reason to have to "prove to anyone" how smart our son is or what he knew as he represented himself very well in the flesh at portfolio reviews, in 3D meetings with mentors, etc. The only reason we ever had him IQ and academic tested by a professional was because I had a lump two doctors felt could be cancer and we feared he would be tossed in (by administrators who never met our son) with 2nd graders (i.e. chronological peers) if I died and that could be more traumatic than perhaps losing a parent, so his testing was scheduled the same day as my biopsy was scheduled. The only reason he took the SAT at age 8 was to be able to take a CTY engineering course that actually gave Hopkins college credit. I know quite a few very sharp homeschoolers who don't bother with standardized testing as they also don't lack any confidence in how their children are doing or feel testing by chronological age rather than grade to be a waste of time. Homeschoolers with kids NOT fairing well academically, however, often WILL get tested so they can get some disability label (not to say the kids don't have a LD, mind you) and get help from the public school system while still homeschooling (in our state, only people with official evidence of an LD are allowed any services from public schools if they are homeschooling).

> Further, only in the last 10-15 years has home-schooling really started to take off as an "alternative" education with the kinds of numbers required for more dependable findings. It is likely that, at the inception of the home-schooling movement, more "purists" were involved. But as the movement becomes more socially acceptable, then the type of parents "following the crowd" will begin to normalize the sampling.

On this we agree, at least to the point that the numbers will get closer (I still feel the teacher to student ratio will always give the homeschoolers an edge). Where's the champagne (or sparkling apple juice for those who don't drink here)? I'll buy.

> "...Nor is there any crime in designing a form of education just for you" you fail to recognize that most districts are now providing funding to home-schoolers for Karate, piano, and soccer to compensate for the inadequacy of home-schoolers at meeting these needs.

Your state is different from ours. In our state, it is an all or nothing proposition (public school access) with the exception of getting an LD and even then, you don't get access to extra-curriculars but to things like a reading specialist, speech specialist, etc. Do you know that *most* districts offer these treats to homeschoolers? I'd like to see the national statistics here as I am skeptical, though you could be right. In our state, the tax money goes to education whether our kids our homeschooled or public schooled or in private school, and that's why there is no incentive to provide anything to homeschoolers if they don't have to, but in some other states, to get the state tax dollars for the children, they must supply SOME service (be in money for books or books loans, letting kids be in the band, whatever) in order to count the kid in their figures for funding and so it is to THEIR monetary advantage to then let the homeschoolers into a few activities or throw them some sort of cash for supplies as is done in Alaska.

> Further, our district provided "free of cost" tutors and persons to correct homework. But these services ARE NOT free of cost.

And I'll bet some money (seriously) that your distrcit is one where they are receiving tax dollars if they provide *something* to homeschoolers, so no, it is not free of cost - the homeschoolers are paying (but so are we, and our kid has never used the public school's services, so more power to those areas where they are getting something for their tax money, though I hear this often comes with strings and red tape that don't make for a nice decoration and so to not feel worse off for the system being what it is in our state).

> The crime lies in that the economy of scale related to larger groups of students is lost,

Now that just makes me laugh, sorry. There are more kids in public schools than ever before - schools are busting at the seams and new ones being built all the time. There is *no* problem with a scale of size going down here. Indeed, the problem is the opposite - the size of schools has gotten too large for their best interest. The days of the one room school house, where the focus wasn't socialization (what schools turned to focusing on where they realized success wasn't quite as easy to measure there as it was with academics, something we had fallen so behind other first world nations at the high school level that it is pathetic) and yet socialization was better as people of all abilities and ages learned in the same room but not the same material at the same time and the student to teacher ratio usually made some sense...well, those days are gone, and honestly, I think it is sort of a pity.

> I would like a study to compare the amount of taxes paid by home-schoolers against the amount of services they receive. I believe the audit will reveal the "crime" in diverting resources disproportionately to the already socially advantaged (having good parents) few.

Wrong. This has been researched, and again, the public schools are MAKING money off homeschoolers, just like they are private schooled kids. Do your research. Seriously, do it.

> Note: You state "our son" a lot in your dissertation, yet seem to find no value in "anecdotal" evidence.

Wrong again. I wrote: I love these anecdotes people throw around about "homeschoolers they know" that goes counter to ALL research ever done on the topic" - I did not say I have anything against anecdotes at all. I love anecdotes as I love hearing real people stories, and I value stories for how interesting they can be. However, I also appreciate that what is more significant is large scale, scientific studies and if one conflicts with the other, I trust the latter far more than the former when it comes to what conclusions to draw.

> Isn't it really about "our children"?

Do you mean isn't education and how it should be done about all children? If so, yes, but I don't believe any one method should be the only method used (including homeschooling, as for an obvious example, some drug addict parents who abuse their kids and the like would not be doing their children a service by homeschooling, I don't suspect) nor do I think homeschooled kids are slighting public schooled kids in the least. They are bringing more diversity to the table and isn't diversity supposed to be so PC today?

> I can sincerely state that when I read your post I was really excited to read of how well your child has performed. I would like it if all children could have parents like you, but some just don't and I believe it is our responsibility to reach out to those children.

First, I don't think our son's performance should be linked too much to me as a parent even if I did supply a share of the DNA. He is very much his own person, and much of his education was on his own. Second, I think it is nice for people to reach out to children who don't have it so good in whatever ways, of course, but I don't feel it is my job to save the world nor all the world's children. I do what I can and am happy with that. My name isn't God, and if there is a God, he seems to be falling down on the job of watching his own children and yet I don't see you daring to point a finger upward. Maybe God is giving these kids grief so they will turn to Him and join him in heaven for eternity. Is it my place to mess with His plans? Seriously, I help kids I see that I can help. I drive my son into the inner city to put on a Cat in the Hat hat and read Dr. Seuss stories to kids in a shelter and help them paint wooden toys. We have picked up food from the grocery store (car loads that the grocery store donates...I don't mean to say this is our own money being spent here, as it is for the new books we give kids in the hospital at Christmas) and made deliveries for the homeless (many of whom are children). I have bought more cookies, wrap, magazines, pizzas, subs, books, candy, you name it from kids selling for all sorts of causes (the biggest being, need I note, the public school...when *I* went to public school, we were NEVER asked to raise money for school OR things like going to another state to be in a game or parade and if you want to question where money is going, here is where you can start questioning; in our area, kids are given fundraising forms THE FIRST DAY OF SCHOOL!!! And it's not part of training in the area of business, either, as they have to repeat this EVERY school year and aren't learning anything new in doing the same fundraising each year). When I have heard of kids who want people to eat at Pizza Hut or other places to raise money for this and that, I have gone even when I have only met some of these kids briefly at a party somewhere. I'm not saving the world's children, no, but I am not some self-absorbed b*tch, either.

On a smiliar topic, I love the school's having "mandatory volunteer work" - what a conflict of terms that one is. And if they don't raise whatever the school quota for the kids is, they know they will often be made to look bad (not always, but all too often), and if they do well, they get some special treat and so are all too often not really raising money for "the cause" so much as their own cause or they are trying to puff up some resume for college applications (I admit I am glad that most graduate school programs seem to care less what volunteer work an applicant has done, though it's a shame many undergrads don't know this and still are trying to improve their odds at graduate school admissions by volunteering rather than volunteering simply to be helping out others).

Okay, it's late and I have to go. There is, after all, more to life than debate (much as I do love a civil debate and appreciate your keeping things civil). Have a great day!

By Apollos (Apollos) on Thursday, September 25, 2003 - 01:22 pm: Edit

Magenta:

I must admit I enjoy reading your posts. Your responses, however, regarding what you and your child have experienced are atypical. I believe that you would agree with that assessment at least. To the extent my experiences with home schoolers are limited by my preferential social circles; my experiences may be somewhat atypical as well. Yet, you can't seem to fully digest what many of us opposing home schooling are saying regarding lazy parents, undisciplined study habits, diversion of limited school resources (I have requested the information you suggested regarding the alleged additional funds for the District based on offering home schooling options, in comparison with the costs of such, and will share that when it arrives), and the self-focused rather than socially concerned attitudes that are apparently fostered in many home schooling environments.

Yet, I will continue my appeals (to anyone who will listen) that the end results academically for a home schooled child, compared with a public schooled child with highly involved parents are very likely not measurably greater. Further, in the case of children with behavior problems, they are likely inferior (because involved parents working with District professionals are a potent force in helping children through such problems - as opposed to Ridalin and "go to your room").

Please don't respond with anymore of the "studies" about how "superior" home schooled children perform. As an engineering expert witness in multi-million dollar construction litigation proceedings, I know the evidentiary requirements for the applicability of a "study" to the decision making process. I have recently observed a high-school educated (yes, perhaps an oximoron) Superintendent impeach the testimony of a Princeton (visiting faculty) engineering expert precisely because the expert relied on a study to assess the germane issues. The Superintendent testified (that would be a factual witness rather than an expert witness) that the conditions specific to the case were significantly divergent from those in the study. I suggest that if any parent is serious enough about home-schooling their children "correctly", they are themselves (by virtue of their level of involvement in their child's education) a case very divergent from your "studies" of public schooling peformance.

Additionally, I find your challenge to "Do your research. Seriously, do it." is very amusing. You suggest that I conduct a national study with proper controls, extensive interviewing, appropriate fiscal accounting review procedures (do you recommend FAR procedures because this is a national review, or should I use each applicable state's procedures), and sampling adjustments for non-participants and those who outright lie. Seriously, you must believe I was home schooled and think the world that small. OK OK I know that was a little too strong. But I think you get my point: Proper studies take time and resources that only government and special interests possess. Bias is almost certainly going to be involved. Do you know how strong the home school lobby is in some states? Not to mention all of the materials publshers, product suppliers, etc. and their persuasive abilities. The teachers unions are as happy as can be with home schoolers, because with their removal the number of parents who would demand reform and accountability in the public schools is greatly diminished. So bias is likely in government studies (and if you have ever read one you will know that they always end with a twelve page footnote stating the extremely limited applicablity of the study). Need I address bias with special interest groups? Further, no study can ever be accomplished that can address the effects that a mom or dad missing from the classroom can have on the other students.

So even though thousands of us non-participants observe the "factual" impact of this trend on both the home-schooled and public schooled, we are relegated to the heap of "status-quo-keepers" and ignored by study waiving proponents. At the end of the day home schoolers may have created a self-fullfilling prophecy regarding the imminent deterioration of the public school systems, and only those children with parents who possess the means and will to home-school will get an adequate education.

The problem is that you and other home schoolers no longer feel compelled to assist in the repairs, or even overhauls to our school systems. Mainly because you are non-participants. It may feel good to have your son be the one reading to the other children, but how do you think the mom of the child in 5th grade (that can't read) feels when your 1st grader was reading to them?

By Magenta (Magenta) on Thursday, September 25, 2003 - 02:10 pm: Edit

> I must admit I enjoy reading your posts.

That's sweet of you to share. Thanks.

> Your responses, however, regarding what you and your child have experienced are atypical. I believe that you would agree with that assessment at least.

Yes, as I said before, I again and again say I realize that *our* story is *not* typical and the same goes for a number of people we know - our circles, like yours, make for stories that are not the norm.

> Yet, you can't seem to fully digest what many of us opposing home schooling are saying regarding lazy parents,

No, I can't, because I have seen no evidence of this being *the norm* (if you mean I can't believe there exists any lazy homeschool parents, that's not sure - I don't doubt they exist, but doubt they are the *norm* and furthermore doubt they exist more in the homeschooling group than the traditional schooling group).

> undisciplined study habits,

Again, all I see is anecdotal evidence here. Looking at the stats, homeschoolers are not on welfare (haven't heard of a single homeschool welfare case, which isn't to say again than none exist, but if one does, it's never been brought up in the press or anywhere I have seen) and thus they must have disciplined enough habits to support themselves (even if it is by manipulating parents into giving them free room and board; for that I blame the parents at least as much as the child). They also have very low crime rates and so aren't injuring society. That is good enough for me, frankly. I'd be delighted if traditional education could boast the same.

> diversion of limited school resources (I have requested the information you suggested regarding the alleged additional funds for the District based on offering home schooling options, in comparison with the costs of such, and will share that when it arrives),

Excellent! Looking forward to learning what you find. Till then, I can add nothing to what I've already noted on who is truly diverting funds from whom.

> and the self-focused rather than socially concerned attitudes that are apparently fostered in many home schooling environments.

Apparently according goes according to your anecdotal evidence again as I have seen no evidence elsewhere. Homeschoolers are often very active in volunteer work even though in most (if not all) states, they are NOT required (like most traditional schooled kids, at least at the high school level) to do such work. I've already mentioned some of what our son has done volunteer wise. He also has put his allowance where his heart is, giving money just in recent months to adopt a whale and fund a new air and space museum. I know he is *not* unusual in this regard as far as homeschoolers go as I know LOTS of homeschoolers across the nation and hear plenty about the volunteer work they are doing.

> Yet, I will continue my appeals (to anyone who will listen) that the end results academically for a home schooled child, compared with a public schooled child with highly involved parents are very likely not measurably greater.

Again, this is a point on which I don't know, so you can certainly make the appeal. As with a court appeal, bring in some evidence and we'll have a verdict.

> Further, in the case of children with behavior problems, they are likely inferior (because involved parents working with District professionals are a potent force in helping children through such problems - as opposed to Ridalin and "go to your room").

Not sure what the children with behavior problems has to do with the conversation here (sorry, I am lost on this ....do you mean very involved parents from traditional schooled kids and homeschooled kids vary here somehow?), but since you mentioned Ritalin, I will also note that it is quite rare for a child to be on that drug when homeschooled. We can debate if that is plus for homeschooled kids or a minus as a side line, if you like, though any topics into Ritalin often get very heated, so maybe we should steer clear of it.

> Please don't respond with anymore of the "studies" about how "superior" home schooled children perform.

Can't do. You have a mission to tell the world that all should be helping public schools. I have a mission in setting straight myths on homeschooling, and studies to me are the most logical way to do it, even if many perfer to turn a blind eye to them because it doesn't support their side of the debate.

> I suggest that if any parent is serious enough about home-schooling their children "correctly", they are themselves (by virtue of their level of involvement in their child's education) a case very divergent from your "studies" of public schooling peformance.

Oh, thank you....this brings up another EXCELLENT way to test your "same parents - same results" theory!!! Kids who are pulled from traditional school and then homeschooled typically have dramatically better results (again, not just academically, but emotionally, socially, etc.)! Indeed, when researchers looked at who were the highest scorers in these areas, it was those who had been homeschooling the longest. The parents never changed, just the form of education. One mother from this board even noted how excellent homeschooling was academically for her son the ONE year he was homeschooled, but SHE found it too tough and back to school he went (which is fine - I don't feel a mother who is unhappy homeschooling should feel she MUST homeschool if other options will work for the kid, and traditional school DID work for her kid most years). The most dramatic single case here was a girl whose mother was told by school administrators that the girl was so retarded that the mother would be better off homeschooling her as there was not much they could really do (read: we don't want your daughter's low scores screwing our overall scores up as we want our school/district to look good, so please get her out of the data). After just ONE YEAR of homeschooling, the girl was re-tested (as this was a state where testing of homeschoolers is mandatory) and guess how she did? She scored well into the GIFTED range!!! Administrators were shocked. But did they say to the mother, "Wow, good job! Keep up the good work with our blessings!"? Oh no, they told the mother that she could no longer homeschool her as only the public schools could educate a child so gifted (read: hey, this girl can increase our school/district scores - we need to get her back into the pool!). Thank goodness this mother hired a lawyer and told the district where they could stick it.

> Additionally, I find your challenge to "Do your research. Seriously, do it." is very amusing. You suggest that I conduct a national study with proper controls, extensive interviewing, appropriate fiscal accounting review procedures (do you recommend FAR procedures because this is a national review, or should I use each applicable state's procedures), and sampling adjustments for non-participants and those who outright lie.

No, no, you misinterpreted my suggestion - sorry, I should have been more precise. There are two kinds of research - one where someone (or a group) goes out and observes something and tries to get something groundbreaking published, and one where people seek what has already been found by those in the first group (and the first group needs to know how to do this second kind so they know what still needs to be learned or confirmed in multiple testings). I meant for you to do the latter - read all you can and try to find *any* research that has a negative read on homeschoolers. I have been seeking this for 9 years now and feel it should exist, but if it doesn't, I have yet to find it (though I confess I haven't been looking much in recent years and so you could turn up something and I seriously encourage you to try).

> Seriously, you must believe I was home schooled and think the world that small.

Ha, cute!

> OK OK I know that was a little too strong.

It was strong, it was black, but like coffee of the same nature, I didn't drink it down, so don't worry

> Need I address bias with special interest groups? Further, no study can ever be accomplished that can address the effects that a mom or dad missing from the classroom can have on the other students.

The largest study on homeschooling to date was done at a university (University of Maryland) by a professor whose own child or children were traditionally schooled. He wanted to find some "con" to homeschooling. He came up dry.

> So even though thousands of us non-participants observe the "factual" impact of this trend on both the home-schooled and public schooled, we are relegated to the heap of "status-quo-keepers" and ignored by study waiving proponents.

We are not ignoring you. We are hardly status quo keepers. I could easily have ignored this thread, but I didn't. As I say, I am open to evidence to the contrary of what I have learned to date. It simply hasn't come in other than in the form of anecdotes, which simply don't do it for me in and of themselves.

> The problem is that you and other home schoolers no longer feel compelled to assist in the repairs, or even overhauls to our school systems.

I can't speak for all homeschoolers, but for myself, I did not create the public school notion and have no attachment to it just for having been "served" (like McDonald's, just not as many burgers down the line yet) by it as child. Why you feel every person should sacrifice their own child's education to try to ineffectually (as it would most likely be since it has been for parents to date) improve a lacking system is beyond me. Some people love trying to aid losers and hang with them. Other people know the best way to know how to win (and I don't mean in just a financial way, but in happiness, as homeschoolers ARE a happier bunch overall) is to hang out with those good at winning. Maybe I am a loser for being in the latter group, but I don't feel that I am.

> Mainly because you are non-participants.

In the public education system, perhaps, but not in life, and life is MUCH bigger than just public school systems.

> It may feel good to have your son be the one reading to the other children, but how do you think the mom of the child in 5th grade (that can't read) feels when your 1st grader was reading to them?

The mothers have seemed quite happy. They feel our son is quite neat and an inspiration for their own child, even knowing their kids likely don't have the innate IQ our son has. At least, this is what they have said to us.

By Apollos (Apollos) on Thursday, September 25, 2003 - 04:32 pm: Edit

Magenta:

Well, I just had to check and see if you had responded yet to my last salvo. Thanks for your time. We could probably go back and forth about what constitutes evidence for mass consumption, but I find that quite boring because I do it every day. However, if you must persist in posting the results of the quaint home-schooling "studies", I must belly up with a challenge. Give me your very best study (of course, just post the link) and then select any school district in the nation that has at least the following composition:

50 elementary schools, 10 middle schools, 8 high schools, a $350,000,000 budget, 20% minority population (give or take 5%), 15% to 22% family financial assistance participation, and school busing. I picked up these numbers online to guage an "average" school district, but if you have a preference I'll use that.

I will request the actual data, methods of accumulation, sampling techniques, error adjustment techniques, and any other pertinent data including the purported entity "behind" the data. Subsequently, I shall serve up on this web site a feast of flaws, limitations, and possible errata of your "study", and why it is not applicable to a parent in that school district. But perhaps you ask, "what can you know that didn't get considered when the study underwent peer review"? Well, remember the peers are in the same field, also hoping to publish and "stay alive" in academia. They must rely on the same assumptions, acceptable correlations, and some statistical "wizardry" to reach conclusory findings in their own papers. They are not motivated to look suspiciously at these types of processes (unless asked to as part of their own "un-biased sponsor"), and as I am. While the predictive accuracy against a substantialy similar population is generally accurate when performed correctly, it must be qualified by the limitations of the study, something I have yet to see a home school board post.

For fun I will address your anecdotal evidence regarding "highly involved public school parents", you wrote:
"academic Kids who are pulled from traditional school and then homeschooled typically have dramatically better results (again, not just academically, but emotionally, socially, etc.)! Indeed, when researchers looked at who were the highest scorers in these areas, it was those who had been homeschooling the longest. The parents never changed, just the form of education."

The parents never changed? How can you state that that was confirmed (not biologically either)? Were the parents active members of the PTA?, did they have their children's teacher phone numbers on their speed dial list? were they working in the classrooms daily? (as they would in home schooling). You cannot answer that, nor can I. But what I would say is that once you start helping in the classroom, it is addictive. My father who will be 90 in two months still assists at his neighborhood school. So if they were THAT involved in their child's education prior to withdrawal I should hardly believe the dramatic improvement would be realized.

Good job not biting the bait on the Ritalin issue(and thanks for correcting my spelling). Like a chess match I only raise my level of play when I see an opponent has more skill; so I will cease the barrage style, disjointed-concept means of debate. However, don't think you can take the moral high ground after baiting me on the "god talk" thing, and the challenge to juxtapose our good deads in public.

Cheers!

By Magenta (Magenta) on Thursday, September 25, 2003 - 07:05 pm: Edit

First, I spent a good half hour responding to your last message only to have my computer crash just before finishing it. Lesson learned - sumbit in parts in the post is long. I thought to do that, and not being gifted, still didn't. Oh no, I thought to do a Control-S to save the long post before going in search of the school system budget, but then stupidly hit another Control-S to grab the budget number and lost the entire saved post in so doing, which I realized a split second later when the system crashed.

Sigh. Okay, since you are such a good sport, I will try to be, too, and will sit here and dedicate another 30 minutes of my life trying to recreate from memory the earlier post.

I had first noted that I never meant to bait you and that I don't even like fish, but did very much enjoy playing "Go Fish" with my mother as a child and eating tuna with mango at my sister-inlaw's last Saturday night (and then noted how I digressed). I added that I never intended to have you feel challenged to state your own good deeds (oh, and I noted that I am correcting your spelling here again, if just using the correct spelling is doing that, but to please not bother thanking me as I am such a poor speller that my son was correcting my spelling when he was 2 years of age, so if you forgive me my poor spelling, I will forgive your typos) but was only defending myself after you implied that homeschoolers don't understand how valuable people are, don't give of themselves to others, etc. Naturally, I did all of this far more interestingly, entertainingly, and while naked and spinning a dish on a stick the first time. ;)

Then I noted that I think the Baltimore County school district might fit your requirements, though I am not positive as I'm not sure what their family financial assistance participation level is. Not sure why you want me to pick the school district, though. I'm not picky here and would think you would want to pick one that has fewer minorities (or mostly Asians for minorities, since they have the highest academic scores on average for any group I've seen in this country) and would have no issue with that as homeschoolers are still predominantly white and so not including a bunch of minorities would be more comparing apples to apples here.

Oh, and I gave the site for the largest homeschool study, so let me do that again. First I gave this website, though:
http://edresearch.org/pare/getvn.asp?v=6&n=13
and said to note the author.

Here is the study link:

http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v7n8/

And I noted that I could find a number of things I consider not too hot about that study, but will let you have the fun of picking at it first. It is the largest study on homeschoolers, but I don't feel it is one of the best. All the same, it is a start.

As you noted, I can't say whether the parents had attended PTA meetings before homeschooling their children (though I know some who did), had their teacher's phone numbers (though again, I know some who did), etc. but it seems somewhat common sense to suspect that the parents who care enough to take on the primary responsibility for their offspring's education would care enough to have been involved in their public schooling if the children were in public school first. Then again, what seems like it would make sense often doesn't in the real world play out that way, so I could be wrong. It happens quite often.

Okay, I am hitting submit before I crash again. I know I left out a lot as this only took me 15 minutes and not 30, but all the less words is all the better for you and YOUR time!

By Apollos (Apollos) on Thursday, September 25, 2003 - 07:30 pm: Edit

Magenta:

Come on, that can't be your best shot. Did you read the Abstract?

"Because this was not a controlled experiment, the study does not demonstrate that home schooling is superior to public or private schools and the results must be interpreted with caution." - Lawrence M. Rudner, author

Compare this with Mr. Rudner's own advice in 1994 regarding the evaluation of tests was:

"In terms of an achievement test, criterion validity refers to the extent to which a test can be used to draw inferences regarding achievement. Empirical evidence in support of criterion validity must include a comparison of performance on the validated test against performance on outside criteria."
- Lawrence M. Rudner, author

No controls?---> bad sample. I'll give you another chance ;)

By Magenta (Magenta) on Thursday, September 25, 2003 - 09:03 pm: Edit

Well, I said I would let you have some fun with it, did I not? One of my biggest pet peeves with Rudner's study, though, is that I think these subjects *were* self-selected and my guess is they also could have cheated on the tests as I think Bob Jones just has the person get some other teacher to supervise tests or something and who's to say the other teacher isn't a relative or something willing to let the kid cheat?!

Okay, for the next take, try the studies Rudner notes in his discussion of his own study. See what you can do with those.