|
|
Post by jarcenas on Mar 18, 2009 13:16:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by The_L on Mar 18, 2009 13:49:17 GMT -5
I agree that I should be able to home-school my kids. However, it is for the opposite reasons.
My aunt, OTOH, is so concerned her older offspring is thinking for itself, she refuses to send the younger to anything but a Christian college.
|
|
|
|
Post by antichrist on Mar 18, 2009 13:56:58 GMT -5
I think homeschooling should be allowed. But I believe there should be testing at least once a year. Basically give parents a set of things that must be taught to pass. If the kid fails the test, then back to public school with them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sigmaleph on Mar 18, 2009 15:22:06 GMT -5
The "logic" in there is puzzling, to say the least. School didn't give birth to a child, so it doesn't have the right to educate them? Am I missing something there?
To answer your question: No. There's not much homeschooling culture here, people send their kids to Catholic schools if they are scared the public system will corrupt them.
|
|
|
|
Post by skyfire on Mar 18, 2009 17:19:08 GMT -5
There are, indeed, legitimate reasons for wanting to home-school a child, such as if the school is failing to properly educate the child (IE: the Army schools over in Germany) or the child is in legitimate physical danger from other students (IE: the high school I went to).
However, you've got fringe elements on both sides of the issue who are making those who are on their same side look bad by comparison. For those who support it, you've got kooks like the person quoted in the OP who regard public schools as sinful for one reason or another; for those who oppose it, you have people who would brand all homeschooling parents as religious freaks or criminals regardless of the education level and motivations.
A better situation would be to, as mentioned above, hold the parents to fairly tight academic standards in order to ensure that the kids are getting what they need.
|
|
|
|
Post by brendanjd on Mar 18, 2009 17:23:43 GMT -5
I would rather homeschool my kids than send them to a public or (Satan forbid) a publicly funded Catholic School. I just want them to understand that education is a lifelong process, not something that can be crushed into 10 months out of the year for 14 years then never spoken of again, which is someting I find schools fundamentally lack these days. It's not like it's an unfounded fear, when stats show that 80% of Americans read exactly 1 book or less a year.
Of course, by the time I have kids, I'll have at least 2, most likely 3, or possibly 4 university degrees, including one in education.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thejebusfire on Mar 18, 2009 17:52:56 GMT -5
I don't think that person ever went to school.
|
|
|
|
Post by skyfire on Mar 18, 2009 18:39:18 GMT -5
Of course, by the time I have kids, I'll have at least 2, most likely 3, or possibly 4 university degrees, including one in education. I myself am looking to have an MBA, and if I do get married it'll probably be to someone who at least has a bachelor's. I'll be pretty set too if I decide to homeschool, although in my case it'll be because I've been inside the local school system and so I know how utterly awful it can be at times. |
|
|
|
Post by trike on Mar 18, 2009 18:54:27 GMT -5
I agree that I should be able to home-school my kids. However, it is for the opposite reasons. My aunt, OTOH, is so concerned her older offspring is thinking for itself, she refuses to send the younger to anything but a Christian college. Fear not, Christian Colleges seem to churn out more skeptics and atheists (or just liberal Christians) than fundies or true blue believers.  |
|
|
|
Post by brendanjd on Mar 18, 2009 18:56:29 GMT -5
Of course, by the time I have kids, I'll have at least 2, most likely 3, or possibly 4 university degrees, including one in education. I myself am looking to have an MBA, and if I do get married it'll probably be to someone who at least has a bachelor's. At the end of next year I'll have a BA with a double major in English and History. The year after that I'll have a BA in education. Hopefully the school my g/f is heading too the year after that has a decent MBA program in either English or History. |
|
|
|
Post by amindfarfaraway on Mar 18, 2009 19:17:00 GMT -5
I'm sure that if I had, I would have most certainly drank until I forgot all about it. And if that wouldn't have worked, I would have just shoved plastic knives into my eyes and ears.
|
|
|
|
Post by skyfire on Mar 18, 2009 19:18:02 GMT -5
At the end of next year I'll have a BA with a double major in English and History. The year after that I'll have a BA in education. Hopefully the school my g/f is heading too the year after that has a decent MBA program in either English or History. MBA = Master's, Business Administration. Each field has its own title for their master's degree. IE, a criminal justice degree would be an MCJ. |
|
|
|
Post by JonathanE on Mar 18, 2009 19:39:33 GMT -5
At the end of next year I'll have a BA with a double major in English and History. The year after that I'll have a BA in education. Hopefully the school my g/f is heading too the year after that has a decent MBA program in either English or History. MBA = Master's, Business Administration. Each field has its own title for their master's degree. IE, a criminal justice degree would be an MCJ. That's incorrect, actually. Master's degree in history would be simply MA (hist), as an example. Master's degrees in arts and social sciences are simply MA's. Master's degrees in hard sciencs are referred to as MSc's. Physicians must obtain an MSc to continue toward their PhD. Nurses obtain MScN's after the BScN's, this being a relatively modern trend. Social workers obtain an MSW. This is a relatively modern invention. Then there is the MBA program, a sort of modern add-on to universities, transplanted business college programs that formerly were not recognized with university degrees. |
|
|
|
Post by brendanjd on Mar 19, 2009 5:53:55 GMT -5
Whoops, my mistake. Must have confused the codes. My Uni only offers a couple of Masters programs, must have read the wrong one.
|
|
|
|
Post by scooby71 on Mar 21, 2009 19:22:42 GMT -5
There may be some that fall into this category, but MBA programs have been recognised with university degrees since the 1950s internationally.
I have an MBA from one of the better schools in the UK and it required 14 hour days - the work load was so much greater than my undergraduate days.
I am quite willing to believe that there are some that are more properly business college programs, and at my university these were recognised by MSc. In my opinion part of the value of an MBA can be determined by how much working experience one should have before embarking on it - if you can get on it without having worked in the outside world it's pretty much worthless, it will give you little advantage because you do not have practical experience.
|
|
