Buy the book!

Fourteen Reasons to Homeschool


Bullying kids.

Bullying was always a problem at schools. It is quite possibly made worse by the current “self-esteem” movement.

Bullying teachers.
    The job of teacher is tailor-made for bullies, control freaks, and terminal bores who cannot otherwise get anyone to listen to them. Unfortunately, we have created no defenses against this. To the contrary, the culture of the public school seems to promote bullies and control freaks.

    Current public school teaching methods don't work.

    See “Operation (aka Project) Follow-Through,” for proof; and the many studies that show that both private schools and homeschooling produce better results on a number of measures. We are at best simply wasting our children's time by sending them to public school.

    Our system of public school teacher selection ensures the worst.

    We know that certain teachers can make a huge difference to scores on standardized tests, and we further know that the best teachers are those who are best at learning and who know the subject best. But our system of teacher certification values courses in education over subject knowledge. Further, we know that those who enter ed schools have lower SAT scores than for virtually any other subject, and almost nobody fails. We are selecting for those who are worst at learning and who know the subject least.

    The public school curriculum has been stripped of the culture. It has become culture-hostile.

    A solid grounding in one's culture—in the wisdom of one's ancestors--is almost the entire point of education. However, the current attitude in schools is that culture is oppression by “dead white males.” This amounts to a systematic attempt to prevent children from becoming educated.

    The public school curriculum has been stripped of essential skills.

    Besides culture, children need facility with certain useful life skills: the proverbial “reading, 'riting, and 'rithmetic,” not to mention logic, foreign languages, and such. The problem, however, is that all such skill acquisition requires memorization. Current educational practice is actively prejudiced against memorization and drill as supposedly “uncreative.”

    The public school curriculum has been stripped of all religious references.

    So currently public schools don't teach any culture, and they don't teach basic skills. Is there anything left? Indeed there is. But they don't teach that either. Even more important than such basic skills for employability and cultural context, the core of any real education is religion. Religion is systematically banned from the public school classroom.

    The public school system does not teach any coherent set of morals.
      This goes with the last point. It is essential that children be taught the difference between right and wrong; the public school is not even prepared to accept that there is a right and a wrong. To the extent that there is a morality taught, in any public school class, it will conflict with any known moral code, confusing and subverting any child being raised with one.

      The public school system is designed to produce employees, not leaders or independent thinkers.

      In response to the accusation that they fail to teach either important information (culture) or basic skills, I expet many defenders of public schools would claim that they instead teach students to think. That, at least, is supposed to be what the resistance to memorization is in favour of. But this is demonstrably false. To teach someone to think, you teach them formal logic, logical fallacies, philosophy, the rules of debate, and the rules of parliamentary procedure. Private schools teach this; public schools rarely do.

      And why not? There is a historical reason. The public schools were consciously designed at the beginning of the last century to produce reliable workers for industry, not leaders. This was a way to preserve the ascendancy of that class that could afford to send their children to private schools. Woodrow Wilson said as much.
      The public school system dehumanizes. It treats kids as objects to be molded to conformity, instead of individual souls.
        The modern school was more or less consciously designed on the model of the assembly line, to produce workers for industry. This is one reason for the elimination of the old one-room schoolhouse—it did not fit the factory model. The “scientific” approach to teaching necessarily objectifies the students.

        The public school system is hostile to boys.

        Boys and girls have very different interests and learn in different ways. Thanks to feminism, almost everything that might interest boys has been banned from the modern classsroom. Boys are commonly told they are no good. This is exacerbated by the fact that elementary teachers are almost overwhelmingly women, who think like women and give boys no role model. Indeed, few men dare teach, because it makes them sitting ducks for career-ending charges of sexual harassment or child abuse, from which women are largely exempt.

        The public school system is hostile to very intelligent kids.

        The system, in the name of “equality,” is invariably more interested in raising the achievement of the slow than in raising the achievement of the quick. Given big classes and big schools, one size must fit all, and the quick are the ones who end up round pegs. They can have little in common with teachers who are not themselves very bright, and may, being control freaks, resent children who are.

        The public school system indoctrinates into a specific political viewpoint.

        Departments of education are commonly hotbeds of radical left-wing politics; a lot of teachers are quite open about their main objective being to indoctrinate. This, of course, works directly counter to the objective of teaching students to think for themselves.

        The public school system is resistant to the new technology with which it is crucial for students to become familiar.

        Because they essentially cannot be fired, having tenure, and face no competition, there is nothing impelling public school teachers to adopt new technology or new methods, other than a personal sense of responsibility or personal desire. Unfortunately, matters are very different in the real world of work most students will face. There, it is essential to keep up with the latest technological innovations in order to compete. This disparity leaves schools lagging further and further behind.

        Word Dynamo

        From Dictionary.com. Looks like an interesting alternative to Quizlet et al. Enter your word list, create a variety of games and quizzes for drill.

        Hat tip to John Allan.

        Word Dynamo

        Online Proctoring

        Great concept. Why didn't I think of this?

        http://www.softwaresecure.com/Main.aspx


        How to Use Google+ Hangouts for Teaching - wikiHow

        How to Use Google+ Hangouts for Teaching - wikiHow:

        'via Blog this'

        Can an Online Game Crack the Code to Language Learning? | MindShift

        An Interesting Way to Convey Large Numbers

        The Pronunciator

        Has apparently nothing to do with Arnold Schwarzenegger. Vocabulary practice, your choice of languages.

        http://www.pronunciator.com/

        Essay Writing Made Easy- The Easy Essay!

        Biggs and Richwine: Public School Teachers Aren't Underpaid - WSJ.com

        Biggs and Richwine: Public School Teachers Aren't Underpaid - WSJ.com:

        'via Blog this'

        Download Free Fonts - Acid Fonts

        Nice collection of novel fonts for materials production.

        Download Free Fonts - Acid Fonts:

        'via Blog this'

        More Education Courses Are Not the Solution | Freedom Forum

        More Education Courses Are Not the Solution | Freedom Forum:

        'via Blog this'

        BookBoon

        Homeschooling beats Schoolschooling on Standardized Tests

        On teaching math

        This reiterates a basic principle I have often stressed here: you cannot teach what you do not know. The essential qualification for being a good teacher is knowledge of the subject. Otherwise you add nothing to the textbook.

        http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/too-many-teachers-cant-do-math-let-alone-teach-it/article2183700/


        Pho.to

        This site offers an unusually good selection of photo effects. Good for materials development--making images interesting.

        Festisite

        This site has a variety of tools that might be useful for materials creation, especially for vocabulary: a fake money maker, fancy text templates, and so forth.

        Leacock on Examinations

        To those who know, a written examination is far from being a true criterion of capacity. It demands too much of mere memory, imitativeness, and the insidious willingness to absorb other people's ideas. Parrots and crows would do admirably in examinations.

        Stephen Leacock, "My Discovery of England" 

        Stephen Leacock on the American University



        The American professor deals with his students according to his lights. It is his business to chase them along over a prescribed ground at a prescribed pace like a flock of sheep. They all go humping together over the hurdles with the professor chasing them with a set of "tests" and "recitations," "marks" and "attendances," the whole apparatus obviously copied from the time-clock of the business man's factory. This process is what is called "showing results." The pace set is necessarily that of the slowest, and thus results in what I have heard Mr. Edward Beatty describe as the "convoy system of education."

        In my own opinion, reached after fifty-two years of profound reflection, this system contains in itself the seeds of destruction. It puts a premium on dulness and a penalty on genius. It circumscribes that latitude of mind which is the real spirit of learning. If we persist in it we shall presently find that true learning will fly away from our universities and will take rest wherever some individual and enquiring mind can mark out its path for itself.
        Leacock, My Discovery of England

        He puts his thumb on it, right enough.

        Depressing Stuff

        --Michael A. Walsh - NYPOST.com:

        'via Blog this'

        Memrise

        Looks like the best vocabulary memorization program yet.

        It's Time to End the War on Salt: Scientific American

        It's Time to End the War on Salt: Scientific American

        Plato's Cave narrated by Orson Welles

        Vocabulary.com

        Designed for native speakers, this might be a bit humbling at first for ESLers. But it promises a systematic way to build your vocabulary.

        English Attack

        A new site seeking to teach English painlessly through online games.

        ELTpics

        Hosted, sponsored, or inspired by the British Council, this is a site full of teacher-supplied photos for common ESL purposes.

        Stykz

        Downloadable free software for making stick figure animation.

        Good for illustrating verbs, idioms.

        The Simpsons Teach Science

        No kidding.

        More on the Higher Ed Bubble

        Higher Education: The Next Asset Bubble? | The Pelican Post

        A VC: Hacking Education (continued) - StumbleUpon

        A VC: Hacking Education (continued) - StumbleUpon

        More on the Education Bubble

        http://techcrunch.com/2011/04/10/peter-thiel-were-in-a-bubble-and-its-not-the-internet-its-higher-education/

        I see two big bubbles in today's world economy: higher education, and China.

        Word Games

        A large compendium of online word-based games.

        Clockwords

        A very slick and professional word-based shooting game. Great for vocabulary and spelling practice.

        The Montessori Mafia - Ideas Market - WSJ

        The Montessori Mafia - Ideas Market - WSJ

        Google Trends Exposes The Education System

        Google Trends Exposes The Education System

        Topicmarks

        Automatic summarizing and abstracting tool. Great for study, but also reading and writing practice.

        A Tableau of a Traditional Arab School

        The curriculum was the Qur'an, used also to teach grammar. Once you learned the Qur'an complete, you graduated.

        Yappr

        The most fun you ever had learning English--with film clips.

        AudioBoo

        Good tool for recording pronunciations.

        Lyrics Training

        An English listening exercise concept with lots of intrinsic motivation: can you get the song lyrics.

        No Conte4st

        Here’s a thought-provoking interview for any instructor. Is competition good or bad?
        Speaking personally, I certainly find competition motivating in the classroom, though not to me personally. I also find too much of it bad.
         It also seems to me that it is an important part of learning to learn how to lose, learn that you are not God, then pick yourself up, and go on. On the other hand, it seems important to learn how to win graciously, with respect for your opponent–and to learn that “winning” is ultimately an empty thing.

        Oh, The Humanities--A Practical Illustration

        A terrible thing has happened in Tucson, and six people are dead. Who's at fault?

        Perhaps not the man who fired the gun, Jared Loughner, 22. It seems clear from what he has posted on Facebook and on YouTube that he was schizophrenic. He may have had no idea what he was doing. He certainly does not seem to have been motivated by any coherent, recognizable political philosophy. His main political concern seems to have been that too many people were illiterate.

        But I do believe someone is to blame. As I have noted before on this site, there is some kind of “spiritual catastrophe,” to use Leonard Cohen's phrase, going on, since the Second World War ended, with rates of “mental illness” of all kinds ballooning. Surely, whoever or whatever is responsible for that spiritual catastrophe is responsible, at one remove, for this expression of that mental illness as well.

        Jared Loughner, from the list of favourite books he left on Facebook, seems to have been an intelligent lad, and certainly ambitious to learn. Plato's Republic, Mein Kampf, The Communist Manifesto, Meno, Animal Farm, Brave New World; perhaps not ideal reading for a troubled young mind, but not light reading, in any case.

        In Loughner's own mind, it seems, his beef was with the education system. Note his concern with illiteracy; a YouTube video he created also argues that the colleges are guilty of fraud and are unconstitutional. He was thrown out of college for disrupting classees.

        I fear he may have been on the right track. It is disturbing on the face of it that such an apparently intelligent and eager student was not able to succeed in school. The schools and colleges no longer offer what he was apparently seeking: answers about life, about life in society, and about what is true. They either lack all awareness of such matters, or ban open discussion of them, and quite possibly look like exercises in mind control. At least some courses and some schools certainly are, self-consciously, exercises in mind control.

        Would any of this bloodletting have happened had Jared Loughner received a proper liberal education, including a thorough grounding in some religious tradition and more broadly in the Humanities?

        I doubt it, personally. First, I suspect that, being a bright lad, he would most probably have by now found the basic answers he sought. And he would have found them in the reassuring company of others also honestly seeking, and of benevolent authority. If so, I suspect he never would have experienced the horrifying visions and fantasies of schizophrenia in the first place. Had he, he at least would have been equipped with a decent road map and a moral compass to test each spirit and make sense of what he was experiencing.

        Not to give this to our children is to throw them into the dark forest without the slightest basic training in survival. And the devil is real, and far more cunning than the Big Bad Wolf.

        Oh, The Humanities!

        Every week there seems to be a new article published in some learned or intellectual journal reporting or lamenting the death of the humanities. Nobody sees much point in humanity any more. This does not strike me as a good sign.

        Amazingly, a hundred and fifty years ago, formal education consisted of very little else. I have just been reading the biography of Thomas Arnold, the acknowledged founder of the English public (in both senses) school system, in Strachey's Eminent Victorians. What Thomas did at Rugby became the model not only for other English public schools, but also for the government schools then being instituted for the general public.

        In Thomas's Rugby, no science was taught. Adding mathematics to the curriculum was Thomas's innovation.

        So what was taught, and why? “That the classics should form the basis of all teaching was an axiom with Dr. Arnold,” writes Strachey. “Rather than have physical science the principal thing in my son's mind,” Arnold wrote in a letter, “I would gladly have him think that the sun went around the earth, and that the stars were so many spangles set in the bright blue firmament.” For all such stuff was trivia. “Surely the one thing needful for a Christian and an Englishman to study is Christian, moral, and political philosophy.” All philosophy, all the time.

        Arnold's opinion was plainly shared by the general public of the day—the obvious proof of this is that they fell over each other trying to get their children into Rugby, and all other English public schools imitated this formula. In Tom Brown's Schooldays, Tom's father observes, “What is a child sent to school for? ... I don't care a straw for Greek participles, or the digamma... If he'll only turn out a brave, helpful, truth-telling Englishman, and a Christian, that's all I want.”

        This approach was not new with Arnold. Arnold was a “reformer,” but the essence of his reform was to return the schools to a high moral tone after a period of decline in this regard.

        On assuming the post of headmaster of Rugby, Arnold also took Holy Orders to become an Anglican priest; the position was automatically a clerical one. Teachers were, first and foremost, “moralists,” as Hughes refers to them causally in Tom Brown's Schooldays, and Arnold's own chief contribution to the education of his charges was his Sunday sermon. Language was taught, not for the sake of being able to speak it—Arnold believed this could never be achieved in a school setting—but for the purpose of “forming the human mind in youth.” Understanding how a language worked was a useful proxy, the closest we had, for understanding how thought works. The classical and biblical stories studied, in turn, furnished the mind with important life lessons to be referred to from then on at any time of need.

        The idea was to develop the whole person, to develop good judgement and good character, on the premise that this would allow him or her to rise to whatever particular demands might come.

        The Confucian tradition in China started with exactly the same basic premise. The Analects preserve this basic principle: “A gentleman is not a tool.” A gentleman can always pick up and discard the specific tools needed for the specific task.

        We now believe just about the opposite, that education should be practical training for a livelihood, and so all about practical skills in science, math, reading, and so forth. This is the essence of the current objection to the humanities: that they lead to no particular job at the other end.

        They used to, of course: they used to lead to two particular jobs: teaching, and the clergy. They should still. But leave that aside; in the old days, the humanities were not for a job, but for a career; or rather, for a life.

        Were our Victorian ancestors so completely wrong? They did reasonably well for themselves, after all, on an objective historical assessment. They managed, for example, to pull together the largest empire the world has ever known; collectively, the nations of Europe took over almost the entire globe in their day. Some, true, may call that a moral failure as much as a practical success; perhaps so, but we must not overlook the practical accomplishment. And so far as morals go, the Victorians also ended slavery and first developed stable representative democracy on a large scale. In their free time, despite their lack of basic training in engineering or science, they put together the Industrial Revolution and most of the groundwork of modern science. They vastly increased human material prosperity, particularly in Europe, but in truth worldwide.

        Have we, in the Twentieth and Twenty-first centuries, done better? We should have—we have had the benefit of standing on their shoulders. We are richer than they were, materially; our technology is more advanced. But we have also lived, as they did not, through history's greatest mass murders and worst totalitarian governments, and the spiritual crisis of the postwar era which has seen unprecedented levels of mental illness. All the arts seem in decline, and the developed West as a whole is in absolute decline demographically. I think it is even fair to say that the end of our civilization almost seems in sight. We no longer believe, as the Victorians did, in the inevitable progress of mankind.

        Perhaps, in the end, they were simply naive, and we know better. Otherwise, it rather looks as if they were right, and we are wrong.

        The Victorians themselves were in no doubt that their success sprang directly from their educational system. “The Battle of Waterloo,” Wellington famously observed, “was won on the playing fields of Eton.” Tom Brown's Schooldays refers to the products of the English school system being “scattered over the whole empire on which the sun never sets, and whose general diffusion I take to be the chief cause of that empire's stability.” “For centuries, in their quiet, dogged, homespun way, they have been subduing the earth in most English counties, and leaving their mark in American forests and Australian uplands.”

        Hughes, the author of Tom Brown's Schooldays, goes on to describe what he sees as the recognizable characteristics of a product of the Victorian English public school. They could argue fiercely, yet retain love and respect for their adversary; “no failures knock them up, or make them hold their hands”; they “go on believing and fighting to a green old age”; “failures slide off them like July rain off a duck's back feathers.”

        Was the author wrong in making these claims? Surely all of us have noticed, as I have, that having gone to a certain school often makes a difference in a personality. And surely the attributes the author describes fit perfectly a particularly admirable type of English character, a Winston Churchill or a Margaret Thatcher—neither of whom were yet born when this description was written.

        That's what the humanities can do; albeit the particular ideals and virtues developed may vary depending on the education's emphasis.

        And it seems almost systematically what our current culture now lacks, and needs: that sense of optimism despite current setbacks; that sense of a purpose and a mission in life; that sense of a responsibility to the future; and, perhaps first and foremost, that sense of fair play and common courtesy towards an adversary.

        Even from a purely practical standpoint, the case for this educational approach seems stronger today than it ever was in Victoria's day. As has often been rightly noted, technology and the social circumstances it produces are changing so fast that the practical skills and specific information we learn in grade school now—or even as a university undergrad--are likely to be of little or no use to us by the time we are in the workforce, let alone by the time we retire. All that drill at multiplication and long division is rather less useful now that we can all do quick calculations on our cell phones. All that memorization of dates and events matters less when we can Google a fact instantly in the same way. All that sweat at declining French irregular verbs is soon going to be rather less useful as our cell phones also instantly translate.

        Devoting long years to purely practical education is, in essence, wasting our children's time.

        What we need is people who have a proper sense of right and wrong, of truth and falsehood, of what the point of it all is, and of sense and nonsense. We need gentlemen, not tools. The tool is the computer.

        How did we get it backwards? The educational model apparently flipped over in about the nineteen teens or twenties. The highly influential writer Charles Bobbit, in 1912, sought quite explicitly to apply the newly efficient procedures of industry to the schools. Ford's assembly line could be usefully transferred to education. Students were little manufactured products, and the process of their manufacture could be both standardized and accelerated, deliberately to meet the needs of industry or the state.

        Woodrow Wilson, for one, was quite blunt: "We want one class of persons to have a liberal education, and we want another class of persons, a very much larger class of necessity in every society, to forgo the privilege of a liberal education and fit themselves to perform specific difficult manual tasks."

        One wonders how much this change of focus has in turn produced the modern world. Abraham Lincoln once observed that “the philosophy of the schoolroom in one generation is the philosophy of government in the next.” Count one generation from 1912, and we have Fascism, Stalinism, Skinnerian behaviourism, and the idea that the individual exists for the benefit of industry or the state. Count two, and we have the tumult of the Sixties, perhaps a direct revolt, if perhaps hopelessly misdirected, against these views.

        Is it still possible to reverse this decline? Perhaps not; another generation may well be too late, given that we have largely stopped reproducing, and the worst of it is that we do not yet seem even to be looking in the right direction. The humanities are still declining, indeed apparently now in free-fall. Current ideas of educational reform cluster around standardized testing; yet any thing that can be clearly measured on a standardized test is a thing ripe for computerization.

        We desperately need to rediscover the human. If we do not, the culture that first does will bury us.


        Colleges Nationwide Recruit Homeschool Grads | LifeSiteNews.com

        Homeschooled students score 37% above the national average on standardized achievement tests.

        Colleges Nationwide Recruit Homeschool Grads | LifeSiteNews.com

        Many Abuse Claims "Totally False"

        Where's the Media? L.A. Att'y Declares Many Abuse Accusations Against Catholic Priests Are 'Entirely False' | NewsBusters.org: "eier relayed, 'One retired F.B.I. agent who worked with me to investigate many claims in the Clergy"

        Knoword

        A challenging vocabulary game, at native-speaker level.

        Tagxedo

        A fancier version of Wordle, with word cloud shapes, like word Mosaic.

        Word Mosaic

        This is like Wordle, but lets you create word clouds in specific shapes.