I know many of you may be shocked and scared at this fact, but just today I taught a class. It was very small, four students, and on philosophy, so all I really needed to do was get them to start talking with each other, but afterwards I got parents and kids thanking me saying the class was lots of fun. This is a 10 week course I'm doing and today was the first class, but if the rest goes like today did then the kids, and even the parents who just listen in, are going to know a whole lot about philosophy. Although I know a decent amount of, and about philosophy I'm not nearly qualified to teach this class, yet I seem to be doing a good job because I know enough, and I'm able to get the kids engaged. That's what I think of as important is a teacher. They need to know the subject, but more importantly, they need to get the kids excited about it.
But did the school teach you that, or was it some other influence, perhaps your family.
What happens to the kids that never learn this, and their parents never learned either.
Definitely primarily spun out of social studies and history classes. When someone teaches you that your country was born of a revolution, and now it sucks, all you can think about is how you want to have a revolution again.
Well that is unfortunate. Those kids are screwed. I like the point made that even though they're probably smarter than children of equivalent age there is still a dangerous possibility they can be manipulated due to the fact they’re not used to questioning things. Damage can be done due too the culture that the child is brought up in with no outside influences. Even if the education level is adequate in all other regards.
Now, is there a feasible way to test if a home educator is not only academically adequate (themselves or the people they pay) and also ensure that the child is also being given the chance to develop socially as well? Probably not. At least laws can be put in place to ensure that half those requirements are met. Is it more inconvenient then sending your child to public schooling? Probably. But the onus should be on the individual to prove that the child they are carrying for is being educated properly. I also believe that the parent should be given money from the schooling system if they decide to find other means to education there children as well. As it may be cost prohibitive for a poor parent that recognizes that there public schooling system is poor to be able to afford education via other means.
Comments
Matthew 15:14
What happens to the kids that never learn this, and their parents never learned either.
Now, is there a feasible way to test if a home educator is not only academically adequate (themselves or the people they pay) and also ensure that the child is also being given the chance to develop socially as well? Probably not. At least laws can be put in place to ensure that half those requirements are met. Is it more inconvenient then sending your child to public schooling? Probably. But the onus should be on the individual to prove that the child they are carrying for is being educated properly. I also believe that the parent should be given money from the schooling system if they decide to find other means to education there children as well. As it may be cost prohibitive for a poor parent that recognizes that there public schooling system is poor to be able to afford education via other means.