|
On January 11 2014 01:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2014 15:17 packrat386 wrote:
I think a lot of people also seem to heavily underrate the benefits of a relatively broad education. I'm currently studying computer science, and while almost none of it focused on code specifically, I would say that my education at a traditional (albeit private) high school has greatly helped me both in my studies and just in enjoying life in general. I know a decent amount of people that began learning about their chosen field before leaving high school. While some of them may have liked to have a bit more focus on that field before university, I don't think almost any of them would say that high school held them back when they could have achieved more. As usual in this thread, this is all anecdotal, but the experience of being frustrated with the system may not be as common as you think, even for those students who excel in some area outside of the traditional high school subjects. I think a few people in the thread (e.g., sluggaslamoo) did make a case for school holding them back, only because their teachers were so closed-minded and their parents didn't really allow an opportunity for them to do the things they loved. And that's a pity, and hopefully a rare situation at best. I do agree with you that schools often supply you with a broad enough education that you're likely to find some subjects interesting and promising for future study and possibly career paths. It certainly worked for me.
I'm not denying that it happens at least some of the time. I'm just saying that just because you choose to specialize in a subject that isn't covered by a traditional education, doesn't mean you will necessarily find yourself held back by that education. It can (and does) go either way.
|
On January 11 2014 03:08 packrat386 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2014 01:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 10 2014 15:17 packrat386 wrote:
I think a lot of people also seem to heavily underrate the benefits of a relatively broad education. I'm currently studying computer science, and while almost none of it focused on code specifically, I would say that my education at a traditional (albeit private) high school has greatly helped me both in my studies and just in enjoying life in general. I know a decent amount of people that began learning about their chosen field before leaving high school. While some of them may have liked to have a bit more focus on that field before university, I don't think almost any of them would say that high school held them back when they could have achieved more. As usual in this thread, this is all anecdotal, but the experience of being frustrated with the system may not be as common as you think, even for those students who excel in some area outside of the traditional high school subjects. I think a few people in the thread (e.g., sluggaslamoo) did make a case for school holding them back, only because their teachers were so closed-minded and their parents didn't really allow an opportunity for them to do the things they loved. And that's a pity, and hopefully a rare situation at best. I do agree with you that schools often supply you with a broad enough education that you're likely to find some subjects interesting and promising for future study and possibly career paths. It certainly worked for me. I'm not denying that it happens at least some of the time. I'm just saying that just because you choose to specialize in a subject that isn't covered by a traditional education, doesn't mean you will necessarily find yourself held back by that education. It can (and does) go either way.
I agree with you. I also feel many people create the false dichotomy between the education gained in school and the education gained outside of school, as if schoolchildren can't still have effective opportunities to learn outside of school, or as if they were mutually exclusive entities.
|
On January 10 2014 10:12 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2014 09:50 Darkwhite wrote:On January 10 2014 09:39 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 10 2014 09:36 Darkwhite wrote:On January 10 2014 09:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 10 2014 07:19 Darkwhite wrote:
With all of the homeschooled people - about five of them? - in here so far thinking it worked out fine for them, it's not really possible to maintain that school is necessary or that homeschooling in and of itself is anywhere near child abuse.
Comparing not sending your children to school to withholding professional medical treatment, is somewhere in between arrogant and delusional. To clarify, I'm merely making the comparison of a stubborn parent thinking he knows more than trained professionals in some field, possibly because he saw something that he's tangentially relating to the field, despite not having proper training, research, or professional experience. Homeschooling isn't about the average parent being more competent than school teachers in all of the disciplines, it is about having children learn without all the sacrifices which comes with cramming children with widely different talents and interests into the same classroom. Regarding your next post: is that all based on the conversation you posted? Can you clarify what you're asking please? With regards to http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=20565051 , I am asking whether you are basing this all on the conversation you actually posted - because it doesn't look like anything he said at all. Particularly the part where he supposedly literally said he wasn't homeschooling his kids, I can't find that one. Right above the Green comment, he explicitly says he's not schooling/ homeschooling his kids.
Thanks, I couldn't for the life of me find that. I still think you're misrepresenting him, though it's hard to know with just ~100 lines from Facebook. Isn't he saying that his children are learning and meeting experts and doing mathematics, but that homeschooling is a misnomer because they aren't just mimicking school at home?
|
hi, most awesome discussion
just to point out a few things:
school saves certain people from the "influence" of their parents, keeping your kids runs the risk of dooming the kids to "at the very least" a greater chance of being tunnel-visionned by said parents (meaning well probably)
keeping your kids at home is impossible for most parents (money/career wise for starters, but also just as a "keeping from going insane" factor)
this is a decision that has to be made by a couple and that in itself can be quite a pickle (for it to work i would think both parents would have to want to do it)
it is (at least in france) quite difficult to go back in or go to and thro from schooled to "home school" (we call it "via mail", kids are allowed to not go providing they show yearly apt results through tests that are not really draconian)
i think the best argument for acceptance of the "at home system" is the fact that it "can" work for some people, but sadly it raises the "same for all" equality issue :/
i'm a firm believer in what school could be, sadly from what i've seen (as pupil, from working with kids, as father of my kid going in school) it is not ...
i wish i could afford to tutor my kids at home, and i am basically working at it / counting on doing it at some point in the future
.. not because of what school could bring my kid, but precisely because it fails to deliver it
social experience could be the best, but it often is less than that
social towards grown ups at school and the investment of teachers is so often bad that not doing more than telling your kid that "sh t happens, nothing he or i can do" is unacceptable
(it is literally is like russian roulette, if he gets missis A he will have a great productive year, if he gets missis B he will spend a wasted one to the point of asking midway to change school :/ )
i always rage at the teachers situation, how important their job is for everything (kids will shape he world) and how they are ill considered by the majority of people (easy proof: no one cares that they are under^paid, no one cares that they are overworked (too many kids in one class, no funding, etc)
i would defend the school system to the bone, if it was permitted/attempting to be what it is supposed to be
as is i can only hope for my kid and save money to allow him several years off
again, very heathy constructive thread, should be featured
glhf
|
saw this on the forbes website (forbes thought of the day)
Forbes Thought Of The Day
“ Education is that which remains when one has forgotten everything he learned in school. ”
— Albert Einstein
I think that pretty much sums up the answer to the question
|
Interesting to read how this developed. Almost every opinion that appeared after page 3 seemed to be wildly in favour of blue. I was and still am mostly in favour of red. I can see how good, competent, open-minded parents can do blue properly. But for the vast majority red is the only reasonable option. It also depends on the children. I think it would be easier for an only child because I have observed that only children often are 'friends' with their parents more often and respect them more in general. There is no way I could have survived being home schooled! Couldn't stand to be in the same room as my parents for more than an hour or two. I would have gone mental.
|
On January 13 2014 20:59 sc4k wrote:
Interesting to read how this developed. Almost every opinion that appeared after page 3 seemed to be wildly in favour of blue. I was and still am mostly in favour of red. I can see how good, competent, open-minded parents can do blue properly. But for the vast majority red is the only reasonable option. It also depends on the children. I think it would be easier for an only child because I have observed that only children often are 'friends' with their parents more often and respect them more in general. There is no way I could have survived being home schooled! Couldn't stand to be in the same room as my parents for more than an hour or two. I would have gone mental.
While I would say that school is probably correct for many/most people, I don't know if I'd say the "vast majority" are better off in school. I think a lot more people could homeschool successfully, and if they did their kids would be better off.
In an ideal world everyone would probably be homeschooled (but in an ideal world you'd have one teacher for every kid at school so then ordinary school would be really good too), but we don't live in an ideal world so I don't necessarily recommend everyone to homeschool, but those who are capable should. In my humble opinion 
|
On January 13 2014 20:59 sc4k wrote:
Interesting to read how this developed. Almost every opinion that appeared after page 3 seemed to be wildly in favour of blue. I was and still am mostly in favour of red. I can see how good, competent, open-minded parents can do blue properly. But for the vast majority red is the only reasonable option. It also depends on the children. I think it would be easier for an only child because I have observed that only children often are 'friends' with their parents more often and respect them more in general. There is no way I could have survived being home schooled! Couldn't stand to be in the same room as my parents for more than an hour or two. I would have gone mental.
With the actual poll though we have 40:5 in favor of Red vs Blue.
I think its because Red's case mostly has an obvious point that doesn't need to be said over and over. However Blue is a little more unknown and invokes a response from a vocal minority.
|
On January 11 2014 14:03 Darkwhite wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2014 10:12 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 10 2014 09:50 Darkwhite wrote:On January 10 2014 09:39 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 10 2014 09:36 Darkwhite wrote:On January 10 2014 09:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 10 2014 07:19 Darkwhite wrote:
With all of the homeschooled people - about five of them? - in here so far thinking it worked out fine for them, it's not really possible to maintain that school is necessary or that homeschooling in and of itself is anywhere near child abuse.
Comparing not sending your children to school to withholding professional medical treatment, is somewhere in between arrogant and delusional. To clarify, I'm merely making the comparison of a stubborn parent thinking he knows more than trained professionals in some field, possibly because he saw something that he's tangentially relating to the field, despite not having proper training, research, or professional experience. Homeschooling isn't about the average parent being more competent than school teachers in all of the disciplines, it is about having children learn without all the sacrifices which comes with cramming children with widely different talents and interests into the same classroom. Regarding your next post: is that all based on the conversation you posted? Can you clarify what you're asking please? With regards to http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=20565051 , I am asking whether you are basing this all on the conversation you actually posted - because it doesn't look like anything he said at all. Particularly the part where he supposedly literally said he wasn't homeschooling his kids, I can't find that one. Right above the Green comment, he explicitly says he's not schooling/ homeschooling his kids. Thanks, I couldn't for the life of me find that. I still think you're misrepresenting him, though it's hard to know with just ~100 lines from Facebook. Isn't he saying that his children are learning and meeting experts and doing mathematics, but that homeschooling is a misnomer because they aren't just mimicking school at home?
I'm not exactly sure what experts his children are learning from (e.g., I wouldn't consider him an expert just because he thinks he's good at math and okayish at science), but he is saying that his children are learning things naturally and experiencing the real world, which is good (although, of course, schoolchildren can also experience the real world as well).
On January 12 2014 09:18 Smurfett3 wrote:
saw this on the forbes website (forbes thought of the day)
Forbes Thought Of The Day
“ Education is that which remains when one has forgotten everything he learned in school. ”
— Albert Einstein
I think that pretty much sums up the answer to the question
While it's obviously an interesting quote, I'm not exactly sure it completely solves the complex situation at hand. For example, schools can help you realize your educational potential, motivating you and pointing you in a positive direction. Removing school from the equation entirely may be useful for a minority of children (if done right, as we've talked about throughout the thread), but I don't think 100% of homeschooling experiences will necessarily be Einstein's "education that remains". I fear that this quote creates a false dichotomy between what you learn in school and what you will need to know for the future, if taken seriously and not looked at as merely a tongue-in-cheek quip.
|
On January 13 2014 20:59 sc4k wrote:
Interesting to read how this developed. Almost every opinion that appeared after page 3 seemed to be wildly in favour of blue. I was and still am mostly in favour of red. I can see how good, competent, open-minded parents can do blue properly. But for the vast majority red is the only reasonable option. It also depends on the children. I think it would be easier for an only child because I have observed that only children often are 'friends' with their parents more often and respect them more in general. There is no way I could have survived being home schooled! Couldn't stand to be in the same room as my parents for more than an hour or two. I would have gone mental.
I think the majority still generally agreed with Red (me), although were more interested in discussing the non-traditional nuances of Blue's position (or similar positions) that could still lead to positive educational effects I don't think too many people said I was just flat-out wrong or dumb for posing questions and possible concerns of Blue's platform ^^ 40-5 in the poll in favor of Red over Blue.
I'm happy I went to a (good, affluent, supportive) school instead of being homeschooled too Of course, a few posters in this thread were happy to be homeschooled as well, so that's great too!
|
On January 12 2014 03:36 enord wrote:
hi, most awesome discussion
just to point out a few things:
school saves certain people from the "influence" of their parents, keeping your kids runs the risk of dooming the kids to "at the very least" a greater chance of being tunnel-visionned by said parents (meaning well probably)
keeping your kids at home is impossible for most parents (money/career wise for starters, but also just as a "keeping from going insane" factor)
this is a decision that has to be made by a couple and that in itself can be quite a pickle (for it to work i would think both parents would have to want to do it)
it is (at least in france) quite difficult to go back in or go to and thro from schooled to "home school" (we call it "via mail", kids are allowed to not go providing they show yearly apt results through tests that are not really draconian)
i think the best argument for acceptance of the "at home system" is the fact that it "can" work for some people, but sadly it raises the "same for all" equality issue :/
i'm a firm believer in what school could be, sadly from what i've seen (as pupil, from working with kids, as father of my kid going in school) it is not ...
i wish i could afford to tutor my kids at home, and i am basically working at it / counting on doing it at some point in the future
.. not because of what school could bring my kid, but precisely because it fails to deliver it
social experience could be the best, but it often is less than that
social towards grown ups at school and the investment of teachers is so often bad that not doing more than telling your kid that "sh t happens, nothing he or i can do" is unacceptable
(it is literally is like russian roulette, if he gets missis A he will have a great productive year, if he gets missis B he will spend a wasted one to the point of asking midway to change school :/ )
i always rage at the teachers situation, how important their job is for everything (kids will shape he world) and how they are ill considered by the majority of people (easy proof: no one cares that they are under^paid, no one cares that they are overworked (too many kids in one class, no funding, etc)
i would defend the school system to the bone, if it was permitted/attempting to be what it is supposed to be
as is i can only hope for my kid and save money to allow him several years off
again, very heathy constructive thread, should be featured
glhf
I really appreciate your thoughts on the matter! I'm definitely a proponent of trying to improve schools and the educational system, rather than scrapping everything simply because it has problems. I think it makes a lot of sense too, to have the homeschooled kids be assessed to make sure they're keeping up with schoolchildren.
|
In 1964 the eminent physicist Richard Feynman served on the State of California's Curriculum Commission and saw how the Commission chose math textbooks for use in California's public schools. In his acerbic memoir of that experience, titled "Judging Books by Their Covers," Feynman analyzed the Commission's idiotic method of evaluating books, and he described some of the tactics employed by schoolbook salesmen who wanted the Commission to adopt their shoddy products. "Judging Books by Their Covers" appeared as a chapter in "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!" -- Feynman's autobiographical book that was published in 1985 by W.W. Norton & Company.
http://www.textbookleague.org/103feyn.htm
This part was my favorite
+ Show Spoiler +
We came to a certain book, part of a set of three supplementary books published by the same company, and they asked me what I thought about it.
I said, "The book depository didn't send me that book, but the other two were nice."
Someone tried repeating the question: "What do you think about that book?"
"I said they didn't send me that one, so I don't have any judgment on it."
The man from the book depository was there, and he said, "Excuse me; I can explain that. I didn't send it to you because that book hadn't been completed yet. There's a rule that you have to have every entry in by a certain time, and the publisher was a few days late with it. So it was sent to us with just the covers, and it's blank in between. The company sent a note excusing themselves and hoping they could have their set of three books considered, even though the third one would be late."
It turned out that the blank book had a rating by some of the other members! They couldn't believe it was blank, because [the book] had a rating. In fact, the rating for the missing book was a little bit higher than for the two others. The fact that there was nothing in the book had nothing to do with the rating.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
