The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
Please vote in the Forum Structure Poll. Polling will close at 2PM EST on January 21, 2025.
Online high school - homeschooling that doesn't suck?
Feral
ＭＥＭＥＴＩＣＨＡＲＩＺＡＲＤinterior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
ＭＥＭＥＴＩＣＨＡＲＩＺＡＲＤinterior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
Today's San Jose Mercury News had a cover story about Liberty Online, an online high school program offered by Kaplan:
http://www.mercurynews.com/top-stories/ci_15937948?nclick_check=1
This program isn't new, but San Jose is apparently unique in that any student can enroll. Previously, it was only offered to students who were habitually truant or had a special need.
http://kaplanvirtualed.com/liberty/Default.aspx
I've long been on the fence about homeschooling. The idea appeals to me - largely because I had some pretty major problems adjusting to high school myself, I'm not terribly enamored with the idea of fencing kids in an overcrowded institution where they're subjected to a rigid daily regime (and subjected to each other). But homeschooling seems to be primarily the domain of religious wackos and newage hippies who for different respective reasons mostly just want to opt-out of mainstream fact-based education and substitute in their own mythological fantasies.
Homeschooling, but with the (online) supervision of an accredited teacher, with (occasional) in-person interviews and tests, is something that I'm familiar with at the college level (I helped set up one of the first distance learning programs at my college back when the Internet was new and exotic), and I'm happy to see it become more available at the high school level.
http://www.mercurynews.com/top-stories/ci_15937948?nclick_check=1
It's not that he dislikes learning, but Matt Pelletier hated high school -- teachers, homework, the environment and especially the schedule. "I hate getting up early. I can't really do anything at school until sixth period" -- about 2 p.m. "Before that I'm still waking up."
As he begins his junior year, Matt, 16, doesn't have to deal with those annoyances. Last week he fired up his home computer to log on to Liberty Online, which may be the first district-sponsored virtual public school in the Bay Area. There are no classrooms, just students at home, and full-fledged San Jose Unified teachers monitoring via the Web. San Jose Unified's newest school is aimed at students like Matt -- independent learners who don't thrive in traditional schools.
This program isn't new, but San Jose is apparently unique in that any student can enroll. Previously, it was only offered to students who were habitually truant or had a special need.
http://kaplanvirtualed.com/liberty/Default.aspx
I've long been on the fence about homeschooling. The idea appeals to me - largely because I had some pretty major problems adjusting to high school myself, I'm not terribly enamored with the idea of fencing kids in an overcrowded institution where they're subjected to a rigid daily regime (and subjected to each other). But homeschooling seems to be primarily the domain of religious wackos and newage hippies who for different respective reasons mostly just want to opt-out of mainstream fact-based education and substitute in their own mythological fantasies.
Homeschooling, but with the (online) supervision of an accredited teacher, with (occasional) in-person interviews and tests, is something that I'm familiar with at the college level (I helped set up one of the first distance learning programs at my college back when the Internet was new and exotic), and I'm happy to see it become more available at the high school level.
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Feral on
0
Posts
That program in your OP sounds pretty cool, though. I can see it working well for kids who want to learn but don't do well in a traditional school enviornment.
Rigorous Scholarship
It's not the reason why they homeschool that matters it is the content and quality of the education thus provided because of those reasons.
Rigorous Scholarship
Poor guy. How do kids survive in these conditions?!
I have some anecdotal evidence that says they have severely undeveloped social abilities.
Then again where I grew up home school meant religious school.
This is actually some teenage thing. I don't have a link to the study so if anyone does, post it. In short, it was found the majority of teenagers don't function well in the morning due to how whacked out their sleeping schedules are because or hormones/growth spurts.
Although 2PM is kind of excessive, the study found 11am-12pm to be the norm I believe.
There a lot of reasons high school can be legitimately shitty, especially if you're an outsider, as I'm sure many on this board are familiar with.
But having to get up at 7 isn't one of them.
Delayed sleep phases are a topic in and of themselves, but a lot of teenagers have problems with them but they go away (or are significantly reduced) after puberty.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
See that's one thing. At my high school they actually tried to get some of the less mental stuff out of the way early as they could, such as P.E. and music etc.
But just because he isn't at peak brain function at 8am is not much of a reason to cater to kids who find getting up early to be too hard. Its not like he's just going to pop over to a morning schedule in the workplace if he never had to get up early to begin with.
Yep, 11am is the norm, but there are outliers.
My mother has a delayed sleep phase. She dealt with it by going into medicine. She's worked the night shift at the same hospital for 30 years. There are plenty of careers that can accommodate people with a DSP.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Once he gets out of school, he'll need to either conform to a standard work schedule or find a job where he can keep non-9-5 hours.
Rigorous Scholarship
Very few adults have to put up with a schedule as rigid as high schoolers. I don't know any adult who has had a job that requires them to be in a different place every hour, on the hour, starting at 7:30 am.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
If there any evidence this kid has an actual case of DSP? From the article it looks like he just wanted to sleep in every day.
Plus, how can one get into whacky hikinks while ditchin school and taking your girlfriend to a cubs game in your best friend's dad's car if its all online?
Plus no snow days. Thatd be the worst.
And clearly everyone who is an lazy asshole suffers from delayed sleep phases.
It goes beyond that as you could argue that attending a set school with set hours teaches some discipline, because while its true most jobs aren't as rigid as a high school schedule is, they sure as hell are more rigid than waking up at 2pm and flipping on the computer when you get around to it.
If he wants to sleep until 2 pm every day, then he has a delayed sleep phase. Almost by definition. There are other criteria to consider (ie, he doesn't have sleep apnea) but those are just differential diagnoses.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Oh come on.
I can't believe you're actually making that argument seriously.
If this kid can't adjust himself to a regular schedule once he enters the adult world, that's his problem. But when he's in the public school system, I don't see a problem with trying to figure out alternatives for him and kids like him.
Rigorous Scholarship
Sometimes people are losers because they can't get in line and play with everyone else. That's life.
The idea that every excuse in the book becomes a medical disorder that needs to be accommodated has really overstayed its welcome.
Yep, exactly.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Except... this is not medicalising anything? This is an alternative to conventional schools that may suit some children better? And there's no possible reason anybody would want a child to get a subpar education because, damnit, they should just learn to fit in better?
The number one point of school is to learn stuff. The whole "preparing people for jobs" stuff is embarrassing nonsense.
Not at all, so I guess you must recognize the equation works the other way, too. I'm sure he'll get right on digging up that proof for you, Random Internet Guy, because you're the one who really needs it, right?
Going somewhere for set hours might teach 'discipline' (if your idea of discipline is punctuality, at least) but I can't help but think that maybe school should be more concerned about educating. Know what's good at teaching people to show up somewhere on time? Being fired for showing up late. And a school can't do that.
Yes you do.
Me.
Part of the point of public education is teaching kids to fit into the society they are going to have to deal with as adults.
Giving them water wings every time they jump in the pool doesn't teach them how to deal with life.
If people have biological characteristics that conforming is more difficult for them than the average person, then people seek out the assistance of the only professionals with the expertise to actually ameliorate those biological characteristics - doctors - and then those biological characteristics become medical disorders.
If you're unhappy with that state of affairs, pretending that those characteristics don't exist isn't an answer. The answer is making the norm more accommodating. Expectations are easier to change than genes.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Sometimes people are losers because they're ignorant of real problems that real people have, and assume that everyone must be the same as their self-centered self, or be ostracized.
A very minor part. By far the most important part is, you know, learning stuff. The former massively trumps the latter.
The key modifier being "good." Bad schools don't help a damn thing.
I'm sympathetic to the argument that the young'uns need to learn about things like showing up on time and working on the schedule your boss dictates, but high school isn't a job. We can provide alternatives to kids outside the mainstream so that they can hopefully get an education. Once this guy gets out of high school he'll learn pretty quickly about the realities of the workforce.
I think it's up to the individual parents to decide what is the best for their kids in terms of education. And from what I've read about homeschoolers, your description of their learning activities isn't acccurate. They typically take field trips and interact with other homeschoolers and the like.
Rigorous Scholarship
You also don't have a full range of choices in what you'll do for the day. My neighbor homeschools her kids and she's doing them a disservice. The boy reads a couple years beyond what his grade level would be in public school, but he is behind in science (he won't do the experiments because he doesn't like to get dirty and his hand-eye coordination isn't great... which itself is probably related to that he wouldn't color as a kid because he doesn't like it while in school it would have been an assignment that he had to complete), math, and anything else that doesn't involve sitting and reading a non-fiction book, sitting and watching TV, or sitting and playing a video game.
Haha. I refused to colour in school. It was the first time I got into trouble.
When asked why, I said 'My dad doesn't colour at work.'
In my defense, we were colouring for a math assignment. And I don't colour at work, either.
Not necessarily. I want to sleep until 2:00 PM and I don't have DSP. I have a shitty schedule and just shifted from my now-normal time on third (11:00 PM - 7:30 AM) to days for a week.
You're just a bundle of politeness aren't you.
More than anything else, though, I'm against home-schooling because no amount of one-on-one time with Mom can make up for missing out on instruction from people specifically trained to teach. The problem is exacerbated as the kid gets older, too. Unless you're some genius Renaissance Man your kid isn't going to be exposed to as many subject areas, differing viewpoints, and insight from people who actually know what they're talking about when they learn at home.
Yeah, my Mom taught me to read, and my Dad helped me learn fractions, but I don't think either of them ever programmed a computer, ran a fancy chemistry experiment, or solved a physics equation. It's hard to teach people things you know - it's exceptionally difficult to teach them things that you don't.
I resent your characterization of homeschoolers Feral, but I do think that this is a good idea; this is the digital age, why not embrace it?