Homeschooling is banned in California

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

I respect all the posters here, but even just reading this thread, and others, it's easy to see a kind of elitism and misperception that develops among the people here who are homeschooled.

I don't actually think homeschooling is the problem with that. I think that's 'youth', and it wears off.

And, if they never experience it, they will hold on to that opinion for the rest of their lives.

Here is where you depart from logic, BJ. People have a lot of notions at 20 that are different at 40. And different again at 60. And several of the people here aren't even 20! Have a little more trust in the resilience of curiosity. Think of Marjoe Gortner.

It will color the way they view the rest of the world. It's almost a religious vigor about homeschooling.

"Religious vigor" is the burr under your saddle. If you read my link, it is clear that public schooling doesn't eliminate that.

You, yourself, sound a little fervid, on the subject of your debt to public school.

Outside of the most extreme of situations like the inner city, people should give public school a chance.

Stereotype alert. Sometime look at the curve for national merit scholars. *hint* the ones with affirmative grading are largely rural states.

And, if more is needed, there's still plenty of time in the day for parent's to augment their child's education.

Is there, indeed? I know a lot of parents who would disagree with you on that. They may not even get home from work before the kids go to sleep.

Spending a majority of all your formative years with only your parents and siblings is just too much.

Gee. I might need a smilie for "stereotype alert". I'll say, again, all evidence supports the idea that homeschoolers leave the house. They participate in co-ops. They play team sports. They take classes. They volunteer and intern.

What type of link or supporting evidence would break through your denial on this? I get bored restating.

[The Gaffer]

OK, so let's have some data. What is the demographic profile of homeschoolers? And are we saying that homeschoolers are every bit as integrated into society as everyone else? (Note: no-one has said that they can't be; the question is about what happens in real life)

And do people agree that there needs to be SOME sort of regulation in order to detect and prevent abuse or neglect?

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

demographic
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2006/homescho...cteristics.asp

multivariate analysis
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2006/homeschool/multivariate.asp

Here, btw, is a look at what the "curve" looks like for National Merit Scholarships.
http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/...7-post662.html



I don't personally, agree that there needs to be specialized "oversight" of homeschooled families. I likewise don't agree to 'oversight" of families with pre-school aged children, children with gay parents, or children in families who have (or fail to have) dogs. People are innocent until proven guilty. It's quaint, but important.

This gets back to my earlier point. Are schools designed to provide education, or are they merely arms of police enforcement?

[Meriadoc Brandybuck]

Originally Posted by sisterandcousinandaunt

It has to do with public schools. A lot of people (particularly people whose direct experience of homeschoolers is limited) assume that the only problem anyone would have with a public school is that it would be insufficiently Christian. In some cases, an EXCESS of a particular kind of religion is the problem. I think people need the option to be in a learning environment that works for them. Whyever that is.

Ah. Okay.

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

I'll ask you pro-homeschoolers a few questions, averages aside:

Is it possible to get a very good education via public school?

Is it possible to get a very good education via private school?

Is it possible to get a very good education via a homeschooling?

Yes, yes, yes. I merely prefer homeschooling for myself, partially because of the major major gang problems there are in public high schools here, mostly because I like it.

As to what they get from going to public school? A connection to the society that they will become a part of. All the society. Not just the smart kids, the nice kids, the rich kids. They also get to meet the less fortunate, the kids with bad parents, the kids with behavioral issues, the kids with mental issues.

What's good for a society is a society of people that experience and understand one another, as opposed to one where each group spends their entire life in their own little social construct. If you don't get that when you are young, you never get it at all.

Ah, the old "homeschoolers don't have a social life/don't meet anyone 'different'" argument. That is so incredibly assumptious and untrue.

Also, two words: "homeschool groups". Repeat after me: "Homeschoolers have lives." You have no idea how many jokes there are in Homeschool Land about being "cut off" from the world.

I expected you to answer yes to all three questions (were you homeschooled? ), but there are others here who I think truely believe that you can't get a good education from a public school, and that it's some evil place full of evil teachers and evil children. And, if they never experience it, they will hold on to that opinion for the rest of their lives. It will color the way they view the rest of the world. It's almost a religious vigor about homeschooling.

Outside of the most extreme of situations like the inner city, people should give public school a chance. And, if more is needed, there's still plenty of time in the day for parent's to augment their child's education.

Spending a majority of all your formative years with only your parents and siblings is just too much.

Ah, the old "homeschoolers think public school is evil" argument. Public school is perfectly okay. I never went, but I respect those who go to public schools as well as privat schools.

I notice I have a better relationship with my parents and sister since we started homeschooling.

[Thain Peregrin Took I]

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

I'll ask you pro-homeschoolers a few questions, averages aside:

Is it possible to get a very good education via public school?

Is it possible to get a very good education via private school?

Is it possible to get a very good education via a homeschooling?

Yes to all of them. You just have to decide what's best for the kid, and for the entire family. Homeschooling works really well for me.

As to what they get from going to public school? A connection to the society that they will become a part of. All the society. Not just the smart kids, the nice kids, the rich kids. They also get to meet the less fortunate, the kids with bad parents, the kids with behavioral issues, the kids with mental issues.

I have an incredibly diverse group of friends. I have Black, Asian, Phillipino, White, and Hispanic friends. I have friends who live on farms, in the country, and in the city. I have friends that could be called emo and goth. I have several friends with dyslexia. I have friends that are a different religion than I am. I think it's very assuming to immediately think that homeschoolers will only associate with certain groups of people.


My friend's sister had some people who were asking her if she had a social life as a homeschooler. She jokingly replied "We sit in front of the phone and wait for someone to call because it's our only access to the outside world."

In purely educational terms, you can learn a lot any environment. In social terms, you gain a lot from a varied environment. You gain an appreciation for people that are not like you. You learn independence and how to function without a parent around to help.

Just because you homeschool, doesn't mean that you don't appreciate people who are different from you. It also doesn't mean that you don't know how to function without your parent. There's activites that you do where your parent isn't there, such as sports, groups, 4-H/Girl or Boy Scouts, etc. You still get a varied enviroment.

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by sisterandcousinandaunt

I get bored restating.

I'm not in the mood to respond to pettiness, I get enough of that from Hector and Lief.

To Meri and Thain, thanks for the info. I'll try to give homeschoolers more benefit of the doubt. I've had mixed experiences with many I have known and worked with, but I will admit that many do seem well-adjusted.

On public school, it can be what you and your communtity decides to make it. Our school is what it is because my wife and I have worked to get the community involved with it. We raise money for extra supplies and programs, and we encourage parents who can to come in and help in classrooms, even teaching the students on occasion.

If you give it a chance, it can be a good thing, and you may be helping a lot more children besides just your own.

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

I'm not in the mood to respond to pettiness, I get enough of that from Hector and Lief.

Pettiness? How about complete frustration and annoyance?

I have responded (for over a year) with reasoned arguments and links on this subject. You very seldom respond to what I SAY. You just restate your prejudice (which is all it is) and imply (if not outright state) that homeschoolers are socially and educationally stunted and that homeschooling is an abandonment of society. It's smug, inaccurate, and annoying.

I was giving YOU the benefit of the doubt in assuming that information of some kind would be welcome. This is the response I got. Silly me.

On public school, it can be what you and your communtity decides to make it. Our school is what it is because my wife and I have worked to get the community involved with it. We raise money for extra supplies and programs, and we encourage parents who can to come in and help in classrooms, even teaching the students on occasion.

If you give it a chance, it can be a good thing, and you may be helping a lot more children besides just your own.

Right. Schools are bad because parents are too lazy to help. They're so lazy they quit their jobs so they can homeschool. Be sure to post pictures when they dedicate the wing to you. /sarcasm

[The Gaffer]

Originally Posted by sisterandcousinandaunt

demographic
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2006/homescho...cteristics.asp

multivariate analysis
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2006/homeschool/multivariate.asp

Here, btw, is a look at what the "curve" looks like for National Merit Scholarships.
http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/...7-post662.html



I don't personally, agree that there needs to be specialized "oversight" of homeschooled families. I likewise don't agree to 'oversight" of families with pre-school aged children, children with gay parents, or children in families who have (or fail to have) dogs. People are innocent until proven guilty. It's quaint, but important.

This gets back to my earlier point. Are schools designed to provide education, or are they merely arms of police enforcement?

Thanks for the links, though I couldn't make sense of the last one, and looked like a discussion thread. I found a survey comparing homeschooled vs traditional first year college students though: PDF document which found very few statistically significant differences in performance.

So, homeschoolers are more likely to be white, from families with 3 or less kids, have 2 parents in the household (duh!) and have parents with university degrees, with the strongest asssociation with the parents (their presence and their educational attainment). It seems that they do at least as well at college (year 1 anyway) as their counterparts from the state sector.

No difference in level of income though.

As for police, I don't know who suggested they are an arm of law enforcement. Don't you have social services? What happens in your state if someone is abusing their children? What if they are neglected? School is, of course, one point of contact where these things can be detected by the state; not sending them to school would be one strategy for avoiding it.

As for "innocent until proven guilty" that's a little disingenuous I think. I could set myself up as a home brain surgeon and claim "innocent until proven guilty". The question is the extent to which there needs to be an assurance that children are educated properly. That is THEIR right. It's about the "bad apples" that we were talking about before.

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

Thanks for the links, though I couldn't make sense of the last one, and looked like a discussion thread. I found a survey comparing homeschooled vs traditional first year college students though: PDF document which found very few statistically significant differences in performance.

So, homeschoolers are more likely to be white, from families with 3 or less kids, have 2 parents in the household (duh!) and have parents with university degrees, with the strongest asssociation with the parents (their presence and their educational attainment). It seems that they do at least as well at college (year 1 anyway) as their counterparts from the state sector.

No difference in level of income though.

As for police, I don't know who suggested they are an arm of law enforcement. Don't you have social services? What happens in your state if someone is abusing their children? What if they are neglected? School is, of course, one point of contact where these things can be detected by the state; not sending them to school would be one strategy for avoiding it.

As for "innocent until proven guilty" that's a little disingenuous I think. I could set myself up as a home brain surgeon and claim "innocent until proven guilty". The question is the extent to which there needs to be an assurance that children are educated properly. That is THEIR right. It's about the "bad apples" that we were talking about before.

Close. Three or more children. Smaller families use private schools.

Okay, so you want to postulate a right to be "educated properly". That's not one I'm familier with, but for discussion. Who establishes what that education consists of? Under our Federalist system, the states determine what an education is. However, there's no "right" to that, because private schools set their own standards. So, how does a homeschool differ from a private school, as an agency of social service point of contact? Aren't there non-public schools in GB? Eton?

Innocent until proven guilty is exactly the point, and not disingenuous at all. When I was in the 4th grade, my friend JoAnn came to school, and after watching her for a few moments, I got her aside to ask what the matter was. She was too black and blue from being whipped to sit. I brought the teacher in to see and she was released to lie down in the nurse's office. That, in those days, was the end of that. Certainly no one ever interfered with her father, who had the right to 'discipline' his daughter. Of course it was legal for the teachers to hit children, too. We didn't use car seats for infants, even.

A great many children are abused. Most of them are in the school system. That's not because the school system abuses them, it's just because the majority of children ARE in the school system. Like 40% of missed workdays being on Monday of Friday.

Maybe people wish to establish a society where visiting nurses inspect every house, say, weekly. But don't tie that into the school system, please. Inspect the houses of everyone, because any member of the society may have kids in, to teach piano to, or rake their lawns, or visit their grandparents. Saying 'homeschoolers may become homeschoolers to hide abuse' is just... ridiculous. When has anyone needed to go to THAT kind of trouble to hide abuse? I really, truly, do NOT understand this notion that the State has a right, nay, an obligation, to prophalactically inspect parents. Being in school is no guarantee that children are safe, and homeschooling isn't either. But you can make schooling obligatory and then have a family that packs up and moves... and that's the end of the social service interest in it. You can murder your kids and bury them under a shrubbery, and tell the neighbors, "Yes, they've moved to their Mom's in Montana."

It's not an education issue.

And, from my POV, do as much brain surgery on yourself as you like. In parts of this country, it's not legal to have a midwife supply your pre-natal care, so you do not want to get me started on the flaws in the medical system.

[Mari]

Here we hardly have private schools and homeschooling might even be illegal. (not sure about that).
I went to the elementary school around the corner, which was a 5-starred school, out of 5. Meaning that it was a school with bad statistics. We had Muslim children, children with poor parents, children with divorce parents, etc. The school was focused on delivering kids to the lowest levels of secondary education. The kids who could get higher up where left to their own devices as they "would get there" on their own anyhow. And we did.

The Dutch system is obviously different from the American one, but I think people who "can get there" will get there. Also in public school.

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by sisterandcousinandaunt

Pettiness? How about complete frustration and annoyance?

I have responded (for over a year) with reasoned arguments and links on this subject. You very seldom respond to what I SAY. You just restate your prejudice (which is all it is) and imply (if not outright state) that homeschoolers are socially and educationally stunted and that homeschooling is an abandonment of society. It's smug, inaccurate, and annoying.

I don't respond because you blow my statements out of proportion. As I said, it's not that black and white.

Both homeschooling and public education can be good from and educational point of view, and both can be bad. But I think that the parents are a bigger part of the equation than the public schools.

A vast majority of public schools, while they may not be great, are very good. The fact that most kids (70-80%) graduate with the ability to read, write, do math, and get a job are proof of that. Not every kid is going to be Einstein, or even a Department Store Manager, no matter how they are schooled.

A vast majority of homeschoolers do a fine job as well on the education front.

The question, on purely educational grounds, is what system is better for the 20-30% that don't do well. Obviously, public school is not doing a good enough job but, if they had parents that either had the time or the ability, they would already be doing better. Good parents would not simply watch public school not working and give up. They'd supplement that schooling as best as they can.

This means that either a certain portion of the population is simply born too dumb to ever learn, or they need more than what both their parents and their public schools are providing. Unless we make laws to take kids away from inadequate parents, are only other choice is to make the public schools better.

It's that simple.

On the social front, I think it's important for kids to be exposed to both the good, and more importantly, the bad, of society at a very young age. But that is more of a philosophical argument and is no where near as important as the above.

I'll just agree to disagree on that point.

Originally Posted by sisterandcousinandaunt

Right. Schools are bad because parents are too lazy to help. They're so lazy they quit their jobs so they can homeschool. Be sure to post pictures when they dedicate the wing to you. /sarcasm

First of all, a vast majority of public schools are not bad, and you are simply ignoring reality if you think they are. But more parental involvement would make them even better.

If those who chose to homeschool instead sent their kids to public school and spent their time helping in that school, they'd be giving their children everything they'd be getting at home and helping other children who aren't so lucky.

Success in life is just as much about bringing along the entire society you are a part of as it is about bringing along your family.

[Butterbeer]

Some questions -

1) - Quick straw poll - let's be honest - is not the title of this thread - a "Leading" Statement and a rather innacurate / misleading thing in, and of, itself?

2) What is actually at debate here? Liberty?

3) What duty of care does the State have to it's children, and where is that line drawn?

4) How much of this is truly about religion, as some feel, on one side - and how much is it the "Nanny" State, on the other?

[The Gaffer]

I suspect there is no constitutional right to education, though here it is established by Act of Parliament.

I suspect there are also cultural differences. As I said before, the right to universal education was established here hundreds of years ago. I think we tend to think of teachers more like doctors or nurses: they are specialists because it is a difficult job.

Sis, here in the UK even Eton is inspected, and has to provide evidence that it is giving its customers a good quality education:

Independent Schools Inspectorate: http://www.isi.net/geninfo/who.htm

Can any old radge set up a school where you are?

I think you are being a bit naughty in a minorly hyperbolic stylee . This kind of inspection is not weekly. And I think you'd find I'd be in trouble if I set myself up as a DIY brain surgeon.

I take your point about abuse, but don't agree. As you know, a child is far more likely to suffer serious harm from a member of its own family than from a stranger.

My wife, in her role as a community physiotherapist, has come across children who are being "homeschooled" because their disabled parent wants someone to go get the TV remote for them. They were taken out of school for this reason. That's abuse, of a different kind, but abuse nevertheless.

In reality, education professionals are now trained to spot the signs. There is less sweeping under the carpet than there used to be. However, this is a side issue I guess. But it's one of the reasons I think there should be a legal requirement to demonstrate that you are delivering a good quality education to your children.

The core one is what BJ said: it's about individual vs society. The harm caused to others by us withdrawing our children from the public system vs the benefit we gain for them by doing so.

[Butterbeer]

The core one is what BJ said: it's about individual vs society. The harm caused to others by us withdrawing our children from the public system vs the benefit we gain for them by doing so.

By your use of the word "We" are you declaring your preference then? On this key debate - and the essence of the debate, here: make no mistake this lies at the heart of what will be increasingly, the key issue, of this Millenium.


I'll point out now, just to be crystal clear, that i condider this "homeschooling" as only one tiny aspect of that wider debate / issue.

But i concur, that Individual v's Society is at it's core - but the real debate is more about HOW that "Society" as you call it - and i use the word loosely, is in any meaningful way, made up of Individuals?

Here's the rub...

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

The core one is what BJ said: it's about individual vs society. The harm caused to others by us withdrawing our children from the public system vs the benefit we gain for them by doing so.

That is my main concern. It may be better for the individual child, but worse for society in the long run.

It's kind of like living in a gated community. Obviously, it's safer for those who live there, and maybe even a near necessity in some cities, but is it really the direction we want our society to go?

I know it's not the direction I want.

Public schools can be very good, and I'd prefer to spend my time working on making them better.

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

I don't respond because you blow my statements out of proportion. As I said, it's not that black and white.

I agree. It's not binary. I don't think homeschooling is appropriate for every family. But then, I don't think public schooling is, either. Can we agree on that?

Both homeschooling and public education can be good from and educational point of view, and both can be bad. But I think that the parents are a bigger part of the equation than the public schools.

If this is so, why aren't we helping parents? Why do we help schools?

A vast majority of public schools, while they may not be great, are very good. The fact that most kids (70-80%) graduate with the ability to read, write, do math, and get a job are proof of that. Not every kid is going to be Einstein, or even a Department Store Manager, no matter how they are schooled.

Where is this statistic from? Does it include "dropouts?"

A vast majority of homeschoolers do a fine job as well on the education front.

Good.

The question, on purely educational grounds, is what system is better for the 20-30% that don't do well. Obviously, public school is not doing a good enough job but, if they had parents that either had the time or the ability, they would already be doing better. Good parents would not simply watch public school not working and give up. They'd supplement that schooling as best as they can.

I think this is a more complicated issue that this statement addresses. People are taught that public school is the 'official' place to get an education. That carrioes a lot of weight with people who are unsure about their own gifts or education. And although many teachers I know are bitterly critical of their ability to deal with some children in a classroom setting (because they need to address the majority they may lose the tails on either end of a Bell Curve.) that information isn't always available to parents who are concerned but don't understand how to pursue options.

One of the best Elementary schools in this district is called Maple Lane. It has implemented new strategies for helping its students, many of whom have substantial learning challenges. http://www.vision2015delaware.org/be...es/brandywine/
They just expanded to 5th grade, though. They only have 307 students, and, last year, turned away 88 applicants. I absolutely promise you, the parents of those 88 were concerned about their kids. People around here wait for the choice acceptance letters the way we used to wait for Ivy League college acceptance, and it gets worse as they get older. Competition into certain High Schools is FIERCE.

And the schools are eviscerated, their parents disempowered, because they change schools every 2 years. Your 4 kids wouldn't be in the same school. They'd be in at least 3 schools. Those schools have different kids, different school schedules...all the bakesales and volunteering you'd do would really be for the benefit of the community, because your kids would be gone before they ever cashed the checks.

This means that either a certain portion of the population is simply born too dumb to ever learn, or they need more than what both their parents and their public schools are providing. Unless we make laws to take kids away from inadequate parents, are only other choice is to make the public schools better.

It's that simple.

No, it's not simple. It's a real life issue, and involves families. That makes it, necessarily, "not simple."

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

Can any old radge set up a school where you are?

Just about. Including a "public" school.

I think you are being a bit naughty in a minorly hyperbolic stylee . This kind of inspection is not weekly. And I think you'd find I'd be in trouble if I set myself up as a DIY brain surgeon.

Oh, I'm always naughty. But you wouldn't be in trouble if all the holes you drilled were in your own head. Man's home is his castle.

I take your point about abuse, but don't agree. As you know, a child is far more likely to suffer serious harm from a member of its own family than from a stranger.

Teachers aren't strangers. And, according to a report released by the Department of Education, almost 10 % of students have suffered "sexual misconduct" in a public school. Some studies say more.

[IMG] 3.2 Prevalence in the United States. As a group, these studies present a wide range of estimates of the percentage of U.S. students subject to sexual misconduct by school staff and vary from 3.7 to 50.3 percent (Table 5). Because of its carefully drawn sample and survey methodology, the AAUW report that nearly 9.6 percent of students are targets of educator sexual misconduct sometime during their school career presents the most accurate data available at this time.

Table 5. Percent of U.S. Students Who Have Experienced Educator Sexual Misconduct by Method
AAUW 2000/Shakeshaft Secondary Analysis 2003 Cameron et al. Corbett
et al.
Personal Experience Corbett et al.
Others Stein
et al. Wishnietsky
Contact 6.7 4.1 Not reported 21.1 Not reported 17.5
Noncontact 8.7 Not Studied Not reported 19.5 Not reported 43
All Misconduct 9.6 Not Studied 6.5 50.3 3.7 Not
Reported

3.3 Prevalence in the United Kingdom. A 2000 random probability sample of 2,869 young people between 18 and 24 in a computer-assisted survey focused on abuse and maltreatment of children (Cawson, Wattam, Brooker, and Kelley). One section of the survey covered sexual abuse and asked respondents if they had experienced a number of behaviors and, if so, with whom. The results of this study indicated that .3 percent of the respondents had experienced sexual abuse with a professional, a category which included priests, religious leaders, case workers, and teachers. This is the only study available that includes prevalence data on educator sexual misconduct for the United Kingdom.

[/img]

My wife, in her role as a community physiotherapist, has come across children who are being "homeschooled" because their disabled parent wants someone to go get the TV remote for them. They were taken out of school for this reason. That's abuse, of a different kind, but abuse nevertheless.

Maybe. Maybe it's a natural kind of 'chipping in to help' that used to be common.

The core one is what BJ said: it's about individual vs society. The harm caused to others by us withdrawing our children from the public system vs the benefit we gain for them by doing so.

Yes, I agree. But since all my society is composed of individuals, I just want them to be the best they can, regardless of how they get there.

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by sisterandcousinandaunt

I agree. It's not binary. I don't think homeschooling is appropriate for every family. But then, I don't think public schooling is, either. Can we agree on that?

I think that public schooling can be appropriate and the best option for every family, if we choose to make it a priority.

Our focus for most of this country's history has been "how can we provide public education as cheaply as possible." By comparision, when it comes to something like national defense, money is no object. We spend whatever it takes. You can argue about defense policy, or wasteful spending, but the fact of the matter is that we have the strongest military in the world by an exponential degree.

If we approached education the same way (and maybe cut defense spending 50% along the way), we'd have no problems at all.

If you look at education worldwide, performance is much much better in countries where education, including even college-level education, is provided by the government equally to all people.

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

I think that public schooling can be appropriate and the best option for every family, if we choose to make it a priority.

Our focus for most of this country's history has been "how can we provide public education as cheaply as possible." By comparision, when it comes to something like national defense, money is no object. We spend whatever it takes. You can argue about defense policy, or wasteful spending, but the fact of the matter is that we have the strongest military in the world by an exponential degree.

If we approached education the same way (and maybe cut defense spending 50% along the way), we'd have no problems at all.

If you look at education worldwide, performance is much much better in countries where education, including even college-level education, is provided by the government equally to all people.

Oh, good heavens. This is the exact same argument as in the Vietnam thread. Except you're on the other side, this time. YES, we could make a big shiny hole in the ground. But we don't, because the political will is lacking, and we don't want to mobilize to fix a 'problem' that in your estimation affects 20-30 % of the school age population, max.

Resources are limited. I-95 was shut down for days because the infrastructure was likely to dump 20,000 cars onto a neighborhood. Half the country is in flood emergency. We have troops in the field without proper armor for their vehicles. Our health care system is a nightmare. People are losing their jobs, and their homes, at epidemic proportions. The price of wheat, just plain ordinary wheat, is up 50% since last August. Small bakeries are closing. How many dollars would you like to add to an education system that is notoriously inefficent, and frequently ineffective...and whose pockets will the money come from?

And let's pull back from the long view policy issue for an instant. Today. Not in the great vision forward, not when the Baby Boomers are all collecting every entitlement ever thought up and raisng gerontology to a sacrament, but today, people are trying to get their kids educated.

Who are you to criticise their doing that whatever way works for them? Isn't that part of the greatness of our country, that individuals take responsibility for their families? My link earlier pointed out what happens when 'the village" is actually operating by mob rule. TODAY can't be experienced in the "present conditional" tense. Today is a time when we need to be trying EVERY option, and find out what works. That's science. Why is your "faith' so evident here? And, of course, it's just plain a-historical to say anything about compulsory public school "for most of this county's history" because it's too new for that to be applicable. None of those Founding Fathers were bused to an elementary school the state run. And I'm, personally, sure that if someone had tried, they'd have been resisted.

[The Gaffer]

Originally Posted by sisterandcousinandaunt

nearly 9.6 percent of students are targets of educator sexual misconduct sometime during their school career

Blimey.

How do they define it?

I'm tempted to make a comment about which 9.6% of schools that might be, referring to recent scandals in certain denominational establishments, but my better judgment has prevailed it would appear.

[Butterbeer]

So...

this is effectively a Ménage Ã* trois?

Some sort of Elitist closed-shop?

.........

Well, forgive the rest of us - i had imagined that all of us here at the Moot - regardless of beleif, or view, and indeed, regardless of Doctrine... were free to discuss and debate... ??

Evidently not.

....................

Why do not, you Imperious three, then go somewhere else, like another place entirely, since you will not deem any others, here, worthy of understanding your thought, or argument or being able to follow the merest twist of this elitist closed debate...

Tell me... are, we, the Mooters to be so blatantly and so rudely screwed over and excluded by arrogant elitist Dogmatic Debators that wish to only run their own Agendas and their own cartel?