Home > Teachers Group > Discussion Board

I think i depends. Home schooling is obviously more independent and you can have more choice about your education, what to learn, you can socialise on your own (there are people out there outside the classroom, too ;) , but if school is chosen according to person`s talents and aspirations and if it is a good school, then there is nothing wrong in attending it.

Definitely sending children to school.  I understand why parents would want to homeschool their children, but then children are missing out on the crucial social interaction that is so important at the childhood and adolescent age.  Children need to be able to interact with others and also take up opportunities at school such as clubs, sports, organizations, commmunity service, and other extra-curricular activities.  I also think children being in a school setting will help them adjust to the "real world" better than if they were at home all day long.  They get to interact with different people, hopefully with different ethnicities and backgrounds, and that will help them prepare for interacting with adults as they go off to college and the working world.  Social interaction is a building block in any child's life.

Whenever I hear that people have homeschooled their children, I admire them with awe.  I can't imagine the enormous responsibility that is involved with assuming the giant task of home schooling.  My children went to a private school, but I was very involved with their homework and studying.

I like the system of schools that exists outside the home, I think that children benefit from this experience.  Even though Home Schoolers argue that their children do not lose out on socialization or friendship or activities, I think that they miss out on the wider experience of being part of a community where there are lots of different people who don't agree with you.

If people home school for religious reasons, I think that is fine, but even the Amish community allows their 16 year old children to go into society to decide if they are truly happy being a member of the Amish community or if they want to join general society.  The practice is called Rumspringa.

Up until they are unleashed on secular society, Amish children are home schooled and kept strickly in the community that lives life as if it is the 18th century, no electricity, no cars, no telephones, no modern conveniences.

"During Rumspringa, teens are permitted to briefly leave the Amish community and experiment with aspects of the modern world, like technology, before deciding whether to commit to the Amish lifestyle forever."

http://i.abcnews.com/Primetime/popup?id=5176812&contentIndex=1&page=2&start=false

 

I am in favor of traditional schooling as opposed to home schooling.  Although I see many benefits of the latter and struggle with the negative influences of select children, the fact remains that children must learn to live in the real world.  School is the vehicle to achieve this end.  In my opinion, the socialization provided through traditional schooling [including small exchanges between classes, observed misbehavior, the possibility of having good (as well as bad) teachers, scuffles on the playground, interaction between friends as well as acquaintances, benefits of extracurricular organized activities, etc.] can not be replicated in a home environment.

In reply to #1: Well for someone who has been to three different schools in the last 3 years it's a very good question...being homeschool as well i much enjoyed the "real" highschool setting...but it did not come with out hardships...but when being homeschooled i found myself more focused on my goals and striving much harder be get there...when in a regular highschool i found myself more concerned with freinds and "the dreded highschool drama"

I have seen the benefits and drawbacks of both systems, and I feel that it really boils down to the educational practitioner, be that parent or teacher.

One student I know who was homeschooled all the way through his academic career (except college) is one of the most intelligent people I know, and his parents are responsible for that. They were certain that he received the appropriate content and curriculum, and they ensured that he was ready to move from one area to the next before "graduating" him. They also got him involved socially through programs like scouting, church, and other social opportunities.

Likewise, parents can be just as poor educators as some public school teachers are. They can hinder or help, construct or destruct. It all depends on who is doing the teaching, and the willingness of the pupil to learn. There are equally valid arguments for both sides of this issue, for certain. 

I teach at a hybrid school: independent study Monday, Wednesday, Thursday; classroom activity Tuesday, Friday. It is a nice compromise between private and home education. My own children, however, attend a public school because the district we live in has some exceptional academic and music programs that a small school (or home school) just couldn't match.

Home schooling requires tremendous discipline for both student and parent. I remind my students that their parents ARE teachers. I also encourage both parents and students to set a schedule for the independent study days. Traditional classroom students know where they will be at any given time of the school day. It's too easy to think "I have all day" when at home--which ultimately leads to cramming two days work into 2 hours. However, if a student can master time management at 14,15, or 16, their prospects for success in the long term are good.

If both parent and student are committed to getting the best out of independent studies by working diligently, then the education can be superb. Home school, however, is not for every family. There is certainly room in our education system for all educational strategies.