|
Post by kisekileia on Jun 4, 2010 11:04:44 GMT -5
KM: I support mandatory psychoeducational testing for homeschooled kids because there needs to be someone informed making sure the kids don't have any undiagnosed disabilities. (In fact, I wouldn't mind if every kid in public school got that sort of testing at least once.) Sometimes parents are more on the ball than the schools with regards to their kids' disabilities, but sometimes parents are in complete denial or totally uninformed, and I think homeschooled kids need some protection in case their parents are the latter.
Chandra: Sometimes all schooling options available DO fail. What should happen to kids then?
|
|
|
Post by freefromtyranny on Jun 4, 2010 11:29:48 GMT -5
That seems a little far-fetched.
|
|
|
Post by jemand on Jun 4, 2010 11:37:16 GMT -5
That seems a little far-fetched. I know a bunch of second generation homeschoolers that would disagree with you. Everyone I know is just as likely to report an abusive homeschool family as we are an abusive public school family. And if your claim is that there are all these "homeschooled" kids that never see the light of day then where are they now that they are adults? Well, I *would* guess the vast majority of abusive parents are never reported as abusive, and many children will internalize it and not realize it was abusive until much later.
|
|
|
Post by freefromtyranny on Jun 4, 2010 11:39:39 GMT -5
I'd say that is across the board and has nothing to do with whether the child as homeschooled or public schooled.
|
|
|
Post by margybargy on Jun 4, 2010 12:31:19 GMT -5
I mean, here's my experience as a mainstream mom: My kid goes to the doctor about once a year; it was more when he was preverbal, a little less for ages 4-5. The intake nurse asks me standard questions including "are there guns in the home" "Does anyone smoke around the child". She also directs questions to him, and I'm sure she would notice if he was acting like his answers were false or constrained. He's starting school this year, so we went to the Early Childhood Development Center and did a school-readiness check. I was present for part of it and part of it was an interview/written test in another room. Every day at daycare he's around trained adults who are mandatory reporters of abuse; every day in public school he will be around mandatory reporters; once he starts school he will also have free and mostly confidential access to a counselor. He will take standardized tests every year. You just described almost every foster child in the system. Maybe I'm slow but I don't understand your response to rosa's comment. Do you believe that homeschoolers are never, ever abused? Do you believe that only children who attend public school are abused? Should all children be homeschooled to avoid abuse? Would that solve the problem entirely? Do you think that the minimally invasive (IMO) checks that rosa described are useless? Perhaps your opinion differs from mine and you believe those checks are invasive? Or are you just trying to demonstrate how a homeschooler might feel when certain negatives are assumed about them? I'm not trying to challenge you, honestly. I just really don't get it and I'm genuinely curious. I guess I don't understand why a homeschooling parent would object to some minimum level of oversight. I've got no axe to grind with homeschooling. I'm not emotionally involved with the issue at all. I'd consider homeschooling myself. If I were to homeschool I wouldn't object to testing or infrequent home visits. In fact, I'd welcome it. I'd want to know where my child stands. I'd want to know I'm doing a good job. Is that wrong somehow? Thanks for your patience.
|
|
|
Post by km on Jun 4, 2010 12:33:18 GMT -5
And shall we venture into the subject of abortion since you brought up the unborn? Oh god no... Please not that. *throws self on floor in protest*
|
|
|
Post by km on Jun 4, 2010 12:35:04 GMT -5
kisekileia: Agreed. All of that makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by km on Jun 4, 2010 12:38:48 GMT -5
Well, I *would* guess the vast majority of abusive parents are never reported as abusive, and many children will internalize it and not realize it was abusive until much later. Yes, thank you! And this is true of both homeschooled and non-homeschooled children.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on Jun 4, 2010 12:52:09 GMT -5
People do talk like that. Let us all organize, work hard and pray that the Dominionists and Reconstructionists fail miserably in their agenda. Reminds me of a Civil War re-enactor I heard as a new home school mom. The idea of dressing up and recreating history sounded like an excellent learning experience. I thought this was great, and invited him to speak at our little curriculum fair... whereupon I was humiliated to discover he was a Reconstructionist. Oh my, was I embarrassed! This group was still at least two-thirds full of sane people at this point, who had sucked up and signed the statement of faith so they could attend park days and take part in P. E. and drama classes, etc. I got an earful from outraged moms, and I totally agreed with them. These Dominionists/Reconstructionists are subtle. They mask their true intentions until they think they are in a place where everyone agrees with them. I hope soon all those places will dry up and disappear.
|
|
|
Post by Ex-Adriel on Jun 4, 2010 12:52:20 GMT -5
And shall we venture into the subject of abortion since you brought up the unborn? Oh god no... Please not that. *throws self on floor in protest* And we think the homeschool debate is potentially ugly. Yeesh. Let's leave that can of worms off in the corner, shall we?
|
|
|
Post by freefromtyranny on Jun 4, 2010 13:10:32 GMT -5
It seemed to me that Rosa was implying that since her child does A, B and C that he/she won't be abused. I'm saying that 99% of kids that have been abused and currently reside in state's custody did exactly what she has done.
No. No. No. No. No. No. And no.
Me either.
No.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on Jun 4, 2010 13:13:39 GMT -5
This home school mom has no problem with regulations as long as they are not burdensome or intrusive.
I don't mind keeping records, even daily records.
I have no problem with standardized testing, but they should be evaluated fairly. The 50% on a nationally standardized test is the public school average. That does not mean an "F" folks, that means a "C".
Also since public school kids aren't kicked out of school, I don't think home schooled kids should be forced to stop home schooling if they fall below the 50th percentile, BUT I would think that should trigger mandatory evaluations for learning disabilities, by a professionally lisened child psychologist of the parent's choosing and the parent's expense.
I actually prefer evaluations to standardized testing, because when I paid a lisenced school psychologist to evaluate my kids, she administered standardized tests, went over the results with me, looked at my portfolio, gave me kudos where I was doing well and gave me advice for where I could improve. All for about $75 a child. It was well worth it.
I loved home schooling in Florida, which has covered most of the bases people here have mentioned, including signing an affidavit that you have never been convicted of crimes against children.
I also liked that one reported to your local school board attendance officer. They could request to see your portfolio and daily log upon two weeks written notice. This helped save a lot of kids from no education. And if you were actually teaching, it was easy to see that, too. It took like five minutes for them to complete a check of your box of materials and glance through your log.
The thing is, those who are criminal and paranoid just home school illegally. If they are in your support group, you won't know they are illegal unless they tell you.
I would definitely turn in someone who was home schooling illegally. If you are going to stand on some lofty notion of liberty that puts you above the law, you should be willing to go to jail for that principle. The founders were. They risked their lives, even.
The state I living in now requires annual standardized tests filed with the state. I am in full compliance, and I always have been both here and in Florida.
Now as to the other point, being surrounded by mandatory reporters in daycare and public school: we are all mandatory reporters as far as I know! I would report anyone I suspected of abuse!
I was more fearful of social workers when my children were young, when they were unable to express themselves clearly and were prone to say things that could be misinterpreted. They all do you know! That's why Kids Say the Darndest Things was such a popular TV show when I was a child.
But everywhere a family goes there are mandatory reporters. Church workers are mandatory reporters. Librarians, store clerks, neighbors, tutors, coaches, kid's program directors, everywhere.
The ones hiding out in the country, not in compliance with state regulations, those are the ones whose children are more at risk. I don't see how more regulations will ferret them out.
I think a useful goal would be for state organizations on down to distance themselves from religious fanatacism; for conventions to start publicly shaming them and speaking out about their excesses- that would be useful.
I joined a facebook group called Run Elsie Run. I'd love for them to sell T-shirts and organize protests at our state convention. ;D
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on Jun 4, 2010 13:20:34 GMT -5
Oh yeah, one more comment. I think it was Sierra who said that she felt that home schooling was actually better for her than having to go to public school everyday in a prairie dress, changing schools every two years, etc. Glad to hear it. My daughter also tells me that she loved the home schooling part and all the time it gave her to develop her interests. Also all the time it gave her to lick her adolescent wounds, so to speak. My son doesn't have to home school. He chooses to do so. I suggested reading The Teenage Liberation Handbook earlier and I will do so again. For many teens, public school is like a prison. I'm for freedom of choice for teenagers. That's something I could whole-heartedly support. For movement teens that would probably mean they would run to public school! For some public schooled teens, that would mean they could be free to design their own home school program. For my teen things would pretty much stay the same.
|
|
|
Post by Ex-Adriel on Jun 4, 2010 13:27:59 GMT -5
I want to point out the 'all kids' fallacy. You speak of socialization like there is a certain level which is optimal for every human being... like a plant needs a certain amount of water. But take the analogy to individuals - When I was in college, I watered my aloe plant the same way I watered my african violet, and the aloe died. It literally turned to liquified goo. I overwatered it. In contrast, the african violet's leaves shriveled up - it was underwatered. Socialization is like that for people - there are individual differences that people have, and some people are naturally more introspective and more 'loners' than others. I get my back up a little when people assume that because I was homeschooled, I was allllll alllloooone. I feel like they've got this sad sad film playing in their heads of the sad child I was, outlined in blue, poignant music floating over my head, always standing outside the public school playground, fingers twined in the cold, unfeeling chain-link fence, staring hungrily at the busy schoolyard scene I would never be a part of.... HACK! ;D Give me a break! I was never, and never will be, a social butterfly. I like reading, and being in nature by myself, and working on problems alone. I have friends, I like being around people - but only sometimes. Homeschooling worked for me, but I freely admit that I'm a loner. What I get steamed by is when my social preferences are called a result of abuse or neglect, rather than legitimate personality differences common in all people. My brother (one of them) is a social butterfly - mom homeschooled him for kindergarten before she realized she'd never be able to schedule him enough to satisfy his need for people. Thereafter, he was in school, and did well, sometimes at the same time that I was being schooled at home. The thing people keep talking over is that you can't impose one schooling-structure monolith that will work for all kids. Every person is different. Every person will need something slightly different to grow up and be a fulfilled person. What I want to see is the attitude that people search for, and fight for, the right to find out what works for them, and use it. I just don't think it's valid to argue that public is better than private is better than charter is better than montessori is better than home, because all of them are best for some kid, somewhere. None of these choices are evil, and none are ipso-facto better than the others 'just because.' Arguing for that is getting into dogmatism, rather than being realistic and working towards the best we can do, rather than some ideal of what SHOULD be. Should is never going to happen. Men SHOULD be less abusive - Excellent. In the meantime, I'll contribute funds to women's shelters. Countries SHOULD not make war on each other. That's beautiful. How about I try to find someone on the internet from a different country and work towards a friendship? Send some seed-money to a micro-loan bank for women? Call a member of the military and thank them for protecting our country? Schools SHOULD all be publically supported, with a 1:1 teacher student ratio where the infant child is psychosocialeducationally evaluated into a perfect system designed for them alone, guaranteeing their resulting perfect life. Great, lovely. I'm sending a letter to my congresspeople, asking them to work on mandating federal schooling standards that apply to all types of schools, in all states. Standards and expectations are wonderful - I'm not knocking them. But don't let idealism keep you from trying to make limited baby-steps progress in ways that really do matter. (and Chandra, as much as I'll fight you tooth and nail on the homeschooling thing, If you want help working towards a Children's Rights Act - I'm on it like white on rice. I think that's so very important, and something that people are just now realizing is needed.)
|
|
|
Post by margybargy on Jun 4, 2010 15:39:52 GMT -5
humbletigger and Ex-Adriel, thanks for your thoughtful and detailed responses. You've given me a lot to think about.
My little one is in pre-school now, a Montessori school. She's doing great. My friend's son just finished kindergarten at the public school. He had to take spelling tests....in kindergarten. That sounds absolutely nuts to me. I think I was learning how to tie my shoes in kindergarten.
One of the things I worry about is the "grind" of the public education system. I want dd to enjoy learning, not regard it as some chore. Another thing is she's not crazy about chaos and noise. We actually get to school early to avoid the rush. (Eh...maybe I'm catering too much...I don't know.)
Anyhow, I want to keep my options open and homeschooling has always been pretty mysterious to me. I've got nothing against it, just never knew much about it. So thanks again.
|
|
|
Post by km on Jun 4, 2010 15:54:36 GMT -5
humbletigger and Ex-Adriel, thanks for your thoughtful and detailed responses. You've given me a lot to think about. My little one is in pre-school now, a Montessori school. She's doing great. My friend's son just finished kindergarten at the public school. He had to take spelling tests....in kindergarten. That sounds absolutely nuts to me. I think I was learning how to tie my shoes in kindergarten. One of the things I worry about is the "grind" of the public education system. I want dd to enjoy learning, not regard it as some chore. Another thing is she's not crazy about chaos and noise. We actually get to school early to avoid the rush. (Eh...maybe I'm catering too much...I don't know.) I dunno... In many ways, the "grind" of public school made things a lot easier for me in college. I'd done all those AP courses and stressed myself out over so much work... After ninth grade, I would pretty much go upstairs to my room every day and work until I went to bed (except for dinner). The result was that college was a breeze for me. Very rarely challenging... I did well, and I was efficient about it (and didn't need to devote nearly as much time to studying as I had in high school). I guess I'm just saying... Sure, maybe we're pushing kids a little too much (During her senior year, my cousin was allowed not to take a lunch period so she could take an extra class.). However, I'm not sure it's bad to help kids prepare. I learned to read in first grade, but not long after I came through school, they started doing reading in kindergarten. I... I dunno... Most kindergarten kids aren't getting graded on any kind of A-F grading scale. They probably get a check or a check plus or something similar. It's not so terrible. And having taken a lot a lot of spelling tests over the years? I firmly believe it's important for kids to memorize these things. I mean... The pressure can be tough, I do agree with that. But I honestly found that I was far ahead of students from most other regions of my state... And that counts for something.
|
|
|
Post by margybargy on Jun 4, 2010 16:24:35 GMT -5
humbletigger and Ex-Adriel, thanks for your thoughtful and detailed responses. You've given me a lot to think about. My little one is in pre-school now, a Montessori school. She's doing great. My friend's son just finished kindergarten at the public school. He had to take spelling tests....in kindergarten. That sounds absolutely nuts to me. I think I was learning how to tie my shoes in kindergarten. One of the things I worry about is the "grind" of the public education system. I want dd to enjoy learning, not regard it as some chore. Another thing is she's not crazy about chaos and noise. We actually get to school early to avoid the rush. (Eh...maybe I'm catering too much...I don't know.) I dunno... In many ways, the "grind" of public school made things a lot easier for me in college. I'd done all those AP courses and stressed myself out over so much work... After ninth grade, I would pretty much go upstairs to my room every day and work until I went to bed (except for dinner). The result was that college was a breeze for me. Very rarely challenging... I did well, and I was efficient about it (and didn't need to devote nearly as much time to studying as I had in high school). I guess I'm just saying... Sure, maybe we're pushing kids a little too much (During her senior year, my cousin was allowed not to take a lunch period so she could take an extra class.). However, I'm not sure it's bad to help kids prepare. I learned to read in first grade, but not long after I came through school, they started doing reading in kindergarten. I... I dunno... Most kindergarten kids aren't getting graded on any kind of A-F grading scale. They probably get a check or a check plus or something similar. It's not so terrible. And having taken a lot a lot of spelling tests over the years? I firmly believe it's important for kids to memorize these things. I mean... The pressure can be tough, I do agree with that. But I honestly found that I was far ahead of students from most other regions of my state... And that counts for something. Good points. I got burned out in highschool. It was extremely competitive. I could barely force myself to go to class senior year. In spite of that I was very well prepared for college, and academic life after high school was pretty easy for me. In the long run, it hasn't hurt me at all. I guess I just want dd to have more fun than I did. I have this nagging suspicion that she could learn as much or more in a relaxed environment. But you do make the excellent point that in life, you're not always free to set your own pace. Btw, that kindergarten spelling test was letter-graded! That's what put me off. I don't think I received a letter grade until 4th grade or so. There were no grades at all in kindergarten when I attended. Not that I recall anyway. Of course, it was a looong time ago.
|
|
|
Post by rosiegirl on Jun 4, 2010 16:28:59 GMT -5
Yeah, kisekileia, I've heard that line about "Well, that kind of stuff happens in public schools, too!" from my parents and others, as a way to justify themselves.
You know what I've seen? I've seen plenty of instances in public schools when a parent knows something is wrong with their child, and gets them HELP, not decides that its the schools fault and packs up their toys and goes home, only to isolate their children.
You know what my problem was? I had a problem, and my parents noses were so far up god's ass, that they didnt care. It was all MY fault, and I just wasnt praying for god's love and understanding enough. No, I didnt have a problem with math, I had a problem with god, quite obviously.
No, we cant afford a tutor or even a way to get you help, we'll just let you sink into a pit of self loathing because we think you just dont love god enough.
If you cant afford to properly educate your children, or get them help when they need it, you shouldnt have children. Thats called selfishness, of the worst kind. You dont get to pick and choose your responsibilities as a parent.
|
|
|
Post by rosa on Jun 4, 2010 16:41:29 GMT -5
You know, I specifically said we don't have any system that 100% prevents child abuse. What I am saying is
Homeschooler who are anti-regulation make a big point of saying they don't need oversight because just because they're homeschooling doesn't mean they're doing anything wrong. But that's not why oversight is needed - it's because by homeschooling (and for the people who don't take their kids to doctors, avoiding the medical system) they are eliminating the oversight all the rest of us have.
That oversight is just about all we have in terms of attempts to prevent child abuse. It's not perfect. But it's what we have. Those who opt out of the system in the name of freedom are choosing to completely evade the few checks we put on parents in the interest of defending their children's rights. So I think, if they want to have that opt-out option (which as a lot of people in the thread have pointed out, is a good option for many kids) they need to put in place an alternate system that gives their kids access to people who might be able to do something about abuse.
|
|
|
Post by km on Jun 4, 2010 16:55:39 GMT -5
You know what I've seen? I've seen plenty of instances in public schools when a parent knows something is wrong with their child, and gets them HELP, not decides that its the schools fault and packs up their toys and goes home, only to isolate their children. Well, yes, and it's very good when this can happen. The best thing about schools is that they're trained by people who are trained to be educators--and who can pick out signs of alienation or academic struggle and suggest testing to children. But you do know, right, that this kind of disability testing is not required in the US? My mother has had many a struggling student whom she noticed having social and/or academic struggles, and many a parent who refused to believe anything was wrong. So, you know... It's not fool proof. Also, erm... My mother does file a lot of the mandatory reporting every year when she suspects children of being abused. She tells me the most awful horror stories every year. She had two girls this year who were sexually abused by stepfathers this year--and two mothers who took the side of the stepfathers against the daughters. She sees really awful stuff all the time... I'm pointing this out not becuase I think you're making blanket statements... You have clearly stated that you' aren't. But because I think you're whitewashing the public school experience a little bit. My mother (a well-informed and proud member of the NEA--and a staunch public school supporter) would have a far more critical perspective on this than I have based on what she sees every day. And because she knows that too much choice leads to unequal schools (poor black schools and rich white schools on opposite sides of the tracks), she'd also challenge the ideas about choice that are being promoted by so many here (choices between schools, etc.). If you cant afford to properly educate your children, or get them help when they need it, you shouldnt have children. Thats called selfishness, of the worst kind. You dont get to pick and choose your responsibilities as a parent. Wow... I'm not sure exactly what this means. It doesn't cost parents anything to send kids to public schools, but well... Not every parent can afford the AP exam fees. Nor can every parent afford to live in an affluent zip code where the schools are guaranteed to be outstanding. Not every parent can afford to homeschool a child and/or send a child to a private school if that best suits the childs needs. I'm not sure what exactly you're saying here... It's selfishness for parents who aren't independently wealthy to have kids??? Good god... I hope that's not what you mean. I mean, most folks can't afford to send their kids to swanky private schools. My parents certainly could not, but it would've helped my social alienation quite a lot... Parents cannot possibly foresee/plan for every possible financial need.
|
|
|
Post by usotsuki on Jun 4, 2010 16:58:57 GMT -5
Even the affluent schools, like the high school I went to, had their issues. I got two scars on my head to show for it. :/
|
|
|
Post by Sierra on Jun 4, 2010 18:19:40 GMT -5
I never experienced 'the grind' as a homeschooled teen, but I have to chime in that I was also quite well prepared to succeed in college without setting foot in the public school system since kindergarten. I took one remedial math course, got an A in it, and then went on to graduate with a 4.0. I even took a lab science. The classroom experience was so novel to me that I was spellbound through many college classes. I thought it was amazing that I could go and have conversations with professors. I was not in a position to appreciate those things in high school. The homeschooling experience prepared me to drill through material on my own until I had mastered it, without relying on external help. That continues to serve me well in research. So far our anecdata stacks up to two points for public school/AP, one point for homeschooling. (Do I think everyone should homeschool? Hell no. But for students like me, it was really the best choice.)
|
|
|
Post by amanda on Jun 4, 2010 18:53:26 GMT -5
Chandra, it's terrible what you had to go through, and I'm glad you were able to make it out and share your experiences with us.
As a former public school teacher, I do have to speak up and say that I'm all for homeschooling, with reasonable regulation (I live in Florida).
I look back at myself when I was younger (hindsight is a marvelous thing), and I would have done much better being homeschooled at least from ages 12 - 15. I am extremely awkward socially, and the junior high years are the most unkind to kids like me.
Not enough socialization? For some of us, seven hours a day is too much. Ever hear of overkill? Introverted personalities?
Yeah, I'm forty now. I should be past it.
I'm not. I don't let it rule my life, but the petty humiliations still sting, over a quarter century later. I still wonder at times why... and with my elder son about to enter middle school this fall, those old experiences are at the forefront of my mind. He's a very different child than I was, though; I strongly suspect he'll be just fine.
If not, at least he's got a mother who can relate.
There's just no "one size fits all" prescription for education for children, in part because education in the US is predominantly state-run, with HUGE amounts of local influence. It's rare to find continuity across counties, let alone states. Homeschooling can be a valuable option in a variety of circumstances as have already been mentioned here. Please, let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Wow, that's all nice and disjointed. I'll be back to clarify later on if need be. For now, my treadmill is hollering at me (drat that thing).
Have a happy weekend, everyone!
|
|
|
Post by princessjo1988 on Jun 4, 2010 19:47:29 GMT -5
Wow. Let me shed some light as to why I do want tighter restrictions and regulations on homeschooling, particularly here in Australia. Like I said, I have been both homeschooled and schooled publicly. I reported when I was being schooled publicly. The facts are that I wasn't really aware of DOCS (department of child's services) prior to that. The little I did know about them was that they were trying to take away the rights of parents etc: basically, that they were terrible things of the world etc. I am sure other fundie children in at least my immediate circle were taught the same things as well. Whilst I don't deny that homeschooled kids report, I definitely think it would be worlds harder for them, particularly the homeschoolers on the fundamentalist scale (or in other words, those that homeschool for religious reasons). So why did I then report once I was in the public system? Well it was simply because I knew more about them. So to my way of thinking, if homeschooled kids (particularly those I would class as 'at risk') were exposed to DOCS more frequently, they would absorb that the thing they were taught as such a negative thing would be less so. Particularly in fundamentalism, where children are raised with such fear of the "other' (in this case, DOCS), exposure to it can only be a good thing. And I am in no way advocating weekly visits for those of you so stringently against my idea of having a social worker visit. Once (but I think 4 would be a better number) a year visits at minimum are not what I would class as interfering. And you have to remember, all children in the public school system (here in Australia) have access to guidance counselors, trained teachers etc that know the symptoms of abuse and are well trained as to what to do in the case of abuse. Why do some homeschoolers not want the same protections for their child? And a question for the anti-criminal checks people out there: if there was a person with a criminal (particularly violent) background, would you want him/her teaching in a public school? Err, I would hope that you would not. Why is there a different standard for homeschooling? Now let me stress again, I am not anti homeschooling. I think there are situations where it is a good thing for the child involved. But when it does go wrong, or is done for the wrong reasons, then it goes very, very wrong, and can leave long standing hurt and pain. And I don't think anyone wants that. Jo
|
|
|
Post by arietty on Jun 4, 2010 20:23:32 GMT -5
Chandra, it's terrible what you had to go through, and I'm glad you were able to make it out and share your experiences with us. As a former public school teacher, I do have to speak up and say that I'm all for homeschooling, with reasonable regulation (I live in Florida). I look back at myself when I was younger (hindsight is a marvelous thing), and I would have done much better being homeschooled at least from ages 12 - 15. I am extremely awkward socially, and the junior high years are the most unkind to kids like me. Not enough socialization? For some of us, seven hours a day is too much. Ever hear of overkill? Introverted personalities? Yeah, I'm forty now. I should be past it. I'm not. I don't let it rule my life, but the petty humiliations still sting, over a quarter century later. I still wonder at times why... and with my elder son about to enter middle school this fall, those old experiences are at the forefront of my mind. He's a very different child than I was, though; I strongly suspect he'll be just fine. I completely relate to this amanda. I was under so much deep stress going to school 7 hours a day.. not just the bullying when I was younger but the horror, the sheer horror of having to spend all that time with all those people. I remember it vividly, I always felt like the weight of all the years ahead of me before I could be free was crushing me. And the first day of summer break, when there were all those weeks before I had to return.. this is going to sound weird but I have never felt joy like that since. That was the most intensely joyful experience of my life. I guess similar to a prisoner finally being released. I was an introverted loner child and though I do think most of my teachers were perfectly good, I certainly learned from them if I was interested in the topic, I would have fared much better if I had just been left home for years with a library card. None of my kids are like this. I have toyed with the idea of homeschooling my preschooler but really he enjoys interaction with other people SO much.. he loves getting ideas from others, it would at this point be a poor choice. I'm always thinking about educational options for my kids, asking about different schools etc.. I'm ever the educated consumer on this topic. They are all different. If I ever thought one of them was under the stress I was under I would take them out in a heartbeat.
|
|