Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Not a thread about this one: Common Core (no?)Follow

#52 Sep 08 2014 at 11:26 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
6,543 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
Oldest asks something like "why is milk a liquid?"
Gas would make it harder to transfer nutrients, while solid and plasma would probably kill the adult?


Why as in "what made them decide to make milk a liquid" or why as in "what makes milk a liquid"? I'd have just told them it's liquid because it's made almost entirely of water, as is orange juice, and pretty much anything at all that is "liquid" that you would drink.
____________________________
Galkaman wrote:
Kuwoobie will die crushed under the burden of his mediocrity.

#53 Sep 08 2014 at 11:58 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
Kuwoobie wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
Oldest asks something like "why is milk a liquid?"
Gas would make it harder to transfer nutrients, while solid and plasma would probably kill the adult?


Why as in "what made them decide to make milk a liquid" or why as in "what makes milk a liquid"? I'd have just told them it's liquid because it's made almost entirely of water, as is orange juice, and pretty much anything at all that is "liquid" that you would drink.
Yeah, more like the "what makes milk a liquid" question, and your response was more or less the conversation in a nutshell. She's more interested in the basic questions of her reality right now it seems "Why is this piece of paper red?" (no not red dye, because that becomes "why is the dye red...") or "why do sharks have fins?" and stuff like that.

Kids and their questions and such.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#54 Sep 08 2014 at 12:02 PM Rating: Good
***
2,188 posts
"Why is milk liquid" is such a great question. You get to talk about water and oil, explain pasteurization which leads into a discussion about bacteria, explain homogenization after first teaching about emulsions, explain about surface tension after putting some milk in jar and some water in a jar and shaking both to show how milk froths, explain (and maybe show if you can get to a dairy) how milk separates with the cream floating that gets "skimmed" leaving skimmed milk and relate it back to the water/oil/emulsion discussion. You also get to talk about mammals and the way they nourish their babies, which is why milk is liquid since we can't excrete a solid or a gas (well, not any that are nourishing).

But why is milk white?


EDIT: Although I think I may have forgotten their ages? Are they pre-school? If so, then the answer is, "so you can drink it" or "ask your mother."



Edited, Sep 8th 2014 2:10pm by cynyck
____________________________
"the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
Hermann Goering, April 1946.
#55 Sep 08 2014 at 12:08 PM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
cynyck wrote:
But why is milk white?
Racism.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#56 Sep 08 2014 at 12:13 PM Rating: Good
Gave Up The D
Avatar
*****
12,281 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
cynyck wrote:
But why is milk white?
Vitiligo.



Edited, Sep 8th 2014 2:13pm by Shaowstrike
____________________________
Shaowstrike (Retired - FFXI)
91PUP/BLM 86SMN/BST 76DRK
Cooking/Fishing 100


"We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."
— James D. Nicoll
#57 Sep 08 2014 at 12:35 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
cynyck wrote:
But why is milk white?
Mom forgot to add the chocolate.

cynyck wrote:
EDIT: Although I think I may have forgotten their ages? Are they pre-school? If so, then the answer is, "so you can drink it" or "ask your mother."
Oldest would be starting kindergarten, but even then we've always been into answering everything anyway, it just backs you into a corner sometimes. But hey at least we know how babies are made now. Smiley: lol
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#58 Sep 08 2014 at 12:42 PM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
But hey at least we know how babies are made now. Smiley: lol
Oh sure, I can take apart a computer to see how it works but the minute I suggest doing that with the neighbor's kid I'm inhuman. Smiley: disappointed
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#59 Sep 08 2014 at 12:53 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
But hey at least we know how babies are made now. Smiley: lol
Oh sure, I can take apart a computer to see how it works but the minute I suggest doing that with the neighbor's kid I'm inhuman. Smiley: disappointed
People these days ya? There's work arounds for it though. For example just implant a couple of electrodes and you have a radio controlled kid.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#60 Sep 08 2014 at 10:29 PM Rating: Excellent
**
493 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
"why is milk a liquid?"

Because if it were solid, it would be Smiley: cheese.
#61 Sep 09 2014 at 8:49 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
BonYogi wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
"why is milk a liquid?"

Because if it were solid, it would be Smiley: cheese.

Or, Ice Cream. Smiley: drool (Don't tell the cows!)
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#62 Sep 09 2014 at 4:49 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Catwho wrote:
It's not those kind of home schoolers that concern me, though. It's the religious ones that never let their kids have socialization with anyone else, and who don't give them the broadening experiences where they can learn outside of a traditional curriculum.


Ok. But then your issue is with religious people who isolate their children from the rest of society, not with homeschooling. You do understand that only 21% of kids are home schooled out of some desire to teach/protect their religious beliefs, right? The largest percentage (25%) is because of unsafe schools (which I suppose you could interpret for some to be "unsafe cause they'll teach my kids to be immoral", but presumably has more to do with gangs and guns). 19% do it because they are dissatisfied with the academic quality of tradition education (presumably public school, and can't afford private). 21% do it to spend more time with their children, or because of the need for frequent travel.

Painting the entire issue with the brush of "crazy religious people" is failing to appreciate the larger picture IMO.

Smasharoo wrote:

The efficacy of homeschooling is greatly under-researched


Nah, there is plenty of research. It works amazingly poorly with a few exceptions. Parents who are former teachers or have a background in childhood education, legitimately gifted children, that sort of thing. For average kids, it generally turns out good spellers who fail catastrophically at the university level. Maybe his kids are gifted or he used to be a teacher, I don't really know much about it. If not, he's probably damaging them for life out of some sort of self righteous hubris, which is pretty much the opposite of good parenting.


Wow. Completely false. Home schooled kids do significantly better than traditionally educated kids on standardized tests (by a large margin). This isn't significantly affected by the education level of the parent either, so your whole "if they're a professional educator" bit is wrong as well. Kids simply do better if they're taught at home than in school. And your comment about university fail? Where did you get that idea? Home schooled kids have a 10% higher college graduation rate than those who attended public school and have higher average GPAs as well. I can't speak to whether they choose more lucrative degrees or not, but I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that their after education earnings are higher than those who were milled through our public school system.

Having said all of that, these are averages. Taking a poorly performing student and homeschooling him isn't necessarily the answer. And, obviously, if a bunch of idiot uninvolved parents decide that homeschooling is a magic solution and doesn't require any effort or time on their part, they'll get poor results. But at least right now, most people who choose this do spend the effort to make it work. And as a result, their children are statistically better off for it. It's really hard to argue against that (at least, if you're going to bother to attempt to find any data to support your argument).

Edited, Sep 9th 2014 3:53pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#63 Sep 09 2014 at 4:57 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Oh. And on the original topic, the opposition to common core isn't necessarily found in the specifics of the education itself, but with the idea that we should be mandating so much of what is taught in schools at such a high/broad level in the first place. The more you mandate, the less flexibility individual teachers have to construct their classes. While this may be a good thing with regard to under performing teachers, in our pursuit of standardization, we're also cutting off the outstanding/creative teachers.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#64 Sep 09 2014 at 7:53 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
6,543 posts
gbaji wrote:
Oh. And on the original topic, the opposition to common core isn't necessarily found in the specifics of the education itself, but with the idea that we should be mandating so much of what is taught in schools at such a high/broad level in the first place. The more you mandate, the less flexibility individual teachers have to construct their classes. While this may be a good thing with regard to under performing teachers, in our pursuit of standardization, we're also cutting off the outstanding/creative teachers.


Ok. I can totally see that. So far now it just seems like, "Oh, that's mildly inconvenient to some extent under the condition the teacher has something better in mind who may or may not be able to work it into the common core curriculum. OUTRAGE!"
____________________________
Galkaman wrote:
Kuwoobie will die crushed under the burden of his mediocrity.

#65 Sep 09 2014 at 9:57 PM Rating: Excellent
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
gbaji wrote:
And as a result, their children are statistically better off for it.

We could talk about the data, but it's already established that we disagree on that point, and there are other people capable of discussing that angle with who you might engage or might engage you.

What I would like you to know is something else--purely on anecdotal experiences and lacking as a representative sample--is that you are personally insulting me. I don't know what what your experiences have been, but I believe it's likely I have more interaction with the home-school community than you do. You have not likely had to speak with suicidal children who believe they have no future. You have not likely had to watch those children grow up and struggle to obtain better than minimum wage jobs. It's insulting because I feel you're being so flippant in accepting research which suits you, when the problems of those affected by your position will never be your problems. It seems to me that you have the certainty of someone with nothing to lose.

There is nothing I am asking of you. But I did want you to have this information.
#66 Sep 09 2014 at 11:03 PM Rating: Good
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,957 posts
Allegory wrote:
It's insulting because I feel you're being so flippant in accepting research which suits you, when the problems of those affected by your position will never be your problems. It seems to me that you have the certainty of someone with nothing to lose.
Well said and true on all levels.

You left off the part where money>people in his world; but still, well said.
____________________________
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.

#67 Sep 10 2014 at 6:07 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts


Wow. Completely false. Home schooled kids do significantly better than traditionally educated kids on standardized tests (by a large margin).


Wow. Completely off topic. I said "fail horribly at the University level". Which they do. Not really arguable. They get degrees at a wildly lower rate than public school kids (who do at a lower rate than private school kids, BTW if you're looking for something to hang your hat on). They also attend at a wildly lower rate. They actually score at about the median for standardized tests, but, and this is incredibly important, there is a massive amount of selection bias there. Public school kids are actively encouraged to take SAT or ACT, and nearly all do. The only home-schooled kids who take it are those who are most likely to do well...and they still end up at about the median for public school kids where the group taking the test is far more diverse. If you eliminated the bottom quintile of public school SAT takers, which would bring the per capita test taking cohorts about in line for each group, home-schooled kids do quite poorly.

'm not sure where you got "by a large margin". Either the typical wild fucking guess or an article written on a pro homeschool blog inflating a marginal difference. The last large survey of this kind was in 2002, the national average for SAT was 1020. Homeschooled kids averaged 1092. That's a marginal difference. Kids from my high school, for reference, averaged 1410. That's "a large margin". We could pretend it's because the teaching corps there are magical super heroes or we could just acknowledge that it was an extremely selective high school with massive resources.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#68 Sep 10 2014 at 7:29 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
gbaji wrote:
Painting the entire issue with the brush of "crazy religious people" is failing to appreciate the larger picture IMO.
"We absolutely shouldn't build mosques anywhere near NYC because of radical Islam!"

"Gay marriage shouldn't get cake because Freedom of Religion!"

Edited, Sep 10th 2014 9:30am by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#69 Sep 10 2014 at 3:49 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Allegory wrote:
gbaji wrote:
And as a result, their children are statistically better off for it.

We could talk about the data, but it's already established that we disagree on that point, and there are other people capable of discussing that angle with who you might engage or might engage you.

What I would like you to know is something else--purely on anecdotal experiences and lacking as a representative sample--is that you are personally insulting me. I don't know what what your experiences have been, but I believe it's likely I have more interaction with the home-school community than you do. You have not likely had to speak with suicidal children who believe they have no future. You have not likely had to watch those children grow up and struggle to obtain better than minimum wage jobs. It's insulting because I feel you're being so flippant in accepting research which suits you, when the problems of those affected by your position will never be your problems. It seems to me that you have the certainty of someone with nothing to lose.

There is nothing I am asking of you. But I did want you to have this information.


I appreciate that this may be an emotional issue for you, and want to make it clear that I have no intention of insulting you in any way (heck, I don't know what your personal connection to the issue is). Having said that, the statistics are pretty well established. And lest we assume this is some kind of partisan divide, even Huffington post accepts the data.

For the benefit of Smash (and others):

Quote:
Students coming from a home school graduated college at a higher rate than their peers -- 66.7 percent compared to 57.5 percent -- and earned higher grade point averages along the way, according to a study that compared students at one doctoral university from 2004-2009.

They're also better socialized than most high school students, says Joe Kelly, an author and parenting expert who home-schooled his twin daughters.

"I know that sounds counterintuitive because they're not around dozens or hundreds of other kids every day, but I would argue that's why they're better socialized," Kelly says. "Many home-schoolers play on athletic teams, but they're also interactive with students of different ages."

Home-schooled students often spend less time in class, Kelly says, giving them more opportunity to get out into the world and engage with adults and teens alike.

"The socialization thing is really a nonissue for most home schoolers," he says. "They're getting a lot of it."



As to anecdotal connections, I have an entire family of in-laws heavily involved in both special needs education and home schooling. One family has adopted three children, two of them from the same woman (crack addict who had a second child while they were adopting the first, so they took the second as well). They home school. They are not rich by any means (mother is a stay at home mom, father works in the shipyard, so decidedly blue collar). They've had their ups and downs. Right now, the oldest child has gotten into trouble with drugs and is currently in a treatment program. The middle child (biological sibling to the oldest), is doing much better. She's on track to compete on the Olympic rowing team and is competing right now in some Scandinavian country somewhere.

The sister of that mother (both of whom are siblings to my sisters husband), teaches special needs kids. We're talking about middle school age kids in diapers level special needs. Both of them volunteer through their church and other local social organizations and are ridiculously active. It's just something they do, largely because someone has to. And I hear all the stories, both wonderful and horrific. I'm not unaware of the struggles that people endure in the world around me. However, I'm not sure how any of this invalidates the concept of home schooling, nor why some people seem to view it as such a threat or something. Like they have to convince people that it's some kind of evil thing that must be stopped.

I just don't get it. Also, as I've mentioned many times in the past, I know many people involved at many levels in education. I have two sisters in law who are teachers (both my brothers married teachers, go figure). My best friend is a high school teacher. I've known his family since I was in high school. His dad was a high school teacher. His mom was a school administrator. His sister is a middle school teacher. He married a woman whose father was a district administrator. One of our mutual friends is a middle school teacher. One of my old friends from back in the day is a teacher at one of the juvy schools (where they send kids who have serious violence or anger problems, but still have to receive an education). I lived with a woman for nearly a decade while she pursued her advanced degree. She's currently a professor at some university on the East coast (and doing quite well). One of my other best friends (guy I play RPGs with) wife is a public school teacher.

My point is that, anecdotally, I have direct connection to nearly every level and type of eduction. From K-12 and through the university level. District and local administration levels. Public schooling, home schooling, and special needs (multiple types of special needs). I've heard them all talk about the problems they face, and the restrictions they have to deal with when facing those problems. That doesn't make *me* an expert, but it does mean I'm at least familiar with what people actually doing these things are talking about. I'd never argue that home schooling is the perfect answer for everyone. But I do think that there are a lot of people who disparage it for reasons that are less than honest.


And again, at the risk of pushing this back on topic, the problem with common core is that its another step in the direction of "one size fits all" education. And I've learned anything from discussions with all of those people and all of their different perspectives is that education can't work with a one size fits all model. We need maximum flexibility in education, so as to deal with all of the different needs of different kids. Going in the other direction is a mistake IMO.

____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#70 Sep 10 2014 at 4:04 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Sigh...

Smasharoo wrote:


Wow. Completely false. Home schooled kids do significantly better than traditionally educated kids on standardized tests (by a large margin).


Wow. Completely off topic. I said "fail horribly at the University level". Which they do. Not really arguable.


Except to the degree that the facts completely support the opposite of what you are saying. Sure. WTF? Do you have *any* source for your wild claims?

Quote:
They get degrees at a wildly lower rate than public school kids (who do at a lower rate than private school kids


100% false. Again, wtf? You just make stuff up?

Quote:
They actually score at about the median for standardized tests, but, and this is incredibly important, there is a massive amount of selection bias there. Public school kids are actively encouraged to take SAT or ACT, and nearly all do.


The SAT and ACT are not the only standardized tests in existence. Homeschooled kids take the same standardized tests during their education that public school kids do. More of them actually, given that in order to be allowed to home school, parents have to prove to the district they live in that they are providing a sufficient education. Standardized tests are how they do this (at least around here, can't speak for nutty far NE states). Every year, home schooled kids take the same tests that public school kids take. There is zero selection bias here.

You zeroed in on the college entrance tests, but that's not the statistic I was talking about. So good job on deflection, I guess.

Quote:
The only home-schooled kids who take it are those who are most likely to do well...and they still end up at about the median for public school kids where the group taking the test is far more diverse. If you eliminated the bottom quintile of public school SAT takers, which would bring the per capita test taking cohorts about in line for each group, home-schooled kids do quite poorly.


Yeah. Again, completely meaningless to the topic we're having here.

Quote:
I'm not sure where you got "by a large margin". Either the typical wild fucking guess or an article written on a pro homeschool blog inflating a marginal difference. The last large survey of this kind was in 2002, the national average for SAT was 1020. Homeschooled kids averaged 1092. That's a marginal difference. Kids from my high school, for reference, averaged 1410. That's "a large margin". We could pretend it's because the teaching corps there are magical super heroes or we could just acknowledge that it was an extremely selective high school with massive resources.


Yup. Again, not what we're talking about. Don't you have a child in school? Have you failed to notice that she takes standardized tests every year? It's not like our education system hasn't been doing this for like 50 years or so or anything.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#71 Sep 10 2014 at 6:48 PM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
The SAT and ACT are not the only standardized tests in existence. Homeschooled kids take the same standardized tests during their education that public school kids do

Nope. They do not. Guessing is fun, huh? Hey, link your imaginary source for your assertion, that'll be a blast. I want to see these "same standardized tests" that homeschool kids take and then report data about to someone where you've shown they perform better than public school kids.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.

I kid, I kid, just pretend some more.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#72 Sep 10 2014 at 6:51 PM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
100% false. Again, wtf? You just make stuff up?

Make stuff up like "100% false" with no cite? Nope. I don't do that. I have an education and research skills, remember? Cite something that proves your case and I'll never post here again. Make the same offer if you like and I'll cite something in about 5 minutes.

Let me know.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#73 Sep 10 2014 at 8:12 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
First off, let me add in the next sentence, on the off chance you're taking my "same standardized tests" in the opposite direction than that meant:

Smasharoo wrote:
The SAT and ACT are not the only standardized tests in existence. Homeschooled kids take the same standardized tests during their education that public school kids do. More of them actually, given that in order to be allowed to home school, parents have to prove to the district they live in that they are providing a sufficient education.

Nope. They do not. Guessing is fun, huh? Hey, link your imaginary source for your assertion, that'll be a blast.


Sure. Here's the requirements for Virginia (just one of the first random hits on google):

Quote:
The Home Instruction Statute §22.1-254.1 requires parents to provide “evidence of progress” at the end of the school year. Parents may either submit:

(i) A composite score in or above the fourth stanine on any nationally normed standardized achievement test
(ii) An evaluation or assessment which the division superintendent determines to indicate that the child is achieving an adequate level of educational growth and progress, including but not limited to: (a) an evaluation letter from a person licensed to teach in any state, or a person with a master’s degree or higher in an academic discipline, having knowledge of the child’s academic progress, stating that the child is achieving an adequate level of educational growth and progress; or (b) a report card or transcript from a community college or college, college distance learning program, or home-education correspondence school.


California does not have an actual homeschool law (last I heard anyway). Parents homeschooling their children have to actually declare themselves to be a private school, which places them under the same requirements as a private school (which includes testing).

Here's Florida's requirements:

Quote:

Provide an annual educational evaluation of the student's educational progress to the superintendent. The evaluation must consist of one of the following:

A Florida certified teacher chosen by the parent may evaluate the child's progress based on a review of the portfolio and discussion with the student.
The student may take any nationally-normed student achievement test administered by a certified teacher.
The student may take a state student assessment test at a location and under testing conditions approved by the school district.
The student maybe evaluated by a psychologist holding a valid, active license pursuant to Section 490.003 (7) or (8), F.S.
The student may be evaluated with any other valid measurement tool as mutually agreed upon by the parent and the superintendent.



Most Homeschoolers use standardized tests. They go to the public school district they live in and actually pay to have their child take the same tests that the public school kids, and have them scored by the same test organizations. They do this because it's the easiest way to meet the evaluation requirements. You get to leverage an already existing testing system. I suppose this doesn't preclude some parents working around this, but they'd have to spend more effort avoiding testing of their children than it would take to just sign them up for the tests.

Quote:
I want to see these "same standardized tests" that homeschool kids take and then report data about to someone where you've shown they perform better than public school kids.


You really do have no clue what you're talking about, do you? I've already provided sources which any reader could easily follow to obtain this information. Again: WTF?

You also have provided zero sources to back up a single thing you've said. Are you even going to bother trying here? The evidence in support of what I'm saying is overwhelming and easily obtained via 10 seconds of searching. Your position? Totally absent. It's not just wrong, it's dead wrong. Did you just set out to pick the most wrong position possible and then repeatedly insist it's right? Is this like your brand of strange humor?

It's not like this is even the first time you've done this on this same topic. And you provided no support for your position last time either. Apparently, you didn't learn anything then. Suppose you wont learn anything this time either, and the next time the subject comes up, you'll once again declare with total confidence the same completely false statements. I guess for you it's more about being loud than being right. This is a bit ridiculous though, even for you.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#74 Sep 10 2014 at 8:41 PM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
gbaji wrote:
I have no intention of insulting you in any way

I know. I was attempting to offer you an atypical position, because I think the tune is pretty tired on debates like these.
gbaji wrote:
Having said that, the statistics are pretty well established. And lest we assume this is some kind of partisan divide, even Huffington post accepts the data.

I still don't want to delve too much into the data, but I would like to make a few comments.

Both of your links cite positive data from the NHERI, an organization I have already mentioned earlier. I'm not ignorant of the surveys they produce. They also both cite Michael Cogan (the same study even). Perhaps it might be worth considering the potential significance of coincidences such as these.
#75 Sep 10 2014 at 9:06 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Allegory wrote:
Both of your links cite positive data from the NHERI, an organization I have already mentioned earlier. I'm not ignorant of the surveys they produce. They also both cite Michael Cogan (the same study even). Perhaps it might be worth considering the potential significance of coincidences such as these.


Sure. And I have the same concerns. But someone has to collect relevant data about home schooling, and it's going to tend to be the organization(s) most involved in home schooling. Doubly so if the data out there supports their position, right?

Is there data that refutes theirs? I guess what I'm getting at here is that if the only people doing studies of education statistics involving home schools are those who are pro-homeschooling, it's not fair to dismiss their findings on that basis alone. Because by that argument, the counter position wins by *not* collecting or evaluating data. Which is a bizarre concept. If there's data out there showing the negatives of home schooling, it's kind of the responsibility of those opposed to home schooling to collect and present it. So where is it?

It is kind of interesting that if you do a search on something like "positive effects of home schooling", you'll get a ton of hits for sites quoting all of the positives associated with homeschooling, including the kinds of stats I've mentioned earlier. But if you search for negatives, you don't get a ton of hits of sites showing that home schooling is bad for children, or produces poor education outcomes, or hampers children's development. You get sites talking about the challenges of home schooling. What to expect if you want to do it. What legislation you may have to deal with. How much time and effort it takes. Etc.

That alone is pretty telling, right?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#76 Sep 10 2014 at 9:29 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
It is kind of interesting that if you do a search on something like "positive effects of home schooling", you'll get a ton of hits for sites quoting all of the positives associated with homeschooling, including the kinds of stats I've mentioned earlier. But if you search for negatives, you don't get a ton of hits of sites showing that home schooling is bad for children, or produces poor education outcomes, or hampers children's development. You get sites talking about the challenges of home schooling. What to expect if you want to do it. What legislation you may have to deal with. How much time and effort it takes. Etc.

You really do have no clue what you're talking about, do you? I've already provided sources which any reader could easily follow to obtain this information. Again: WTF?

You also have provided zero sources to back up a single thing you've said.


So true. Amazingly, I'm still correct and you are guessing wildly and linking marketing material. The song really never ends, eh?

States where there are no laws requiring home school children to take standarized tests:

California (you guessed wrong, sorry :( so sad )
Texas
Oklah...

Wait, you know what, it's easier to list states that DO require it as there are so few. NONE of which you've mentioned yet, incidentally, you fucking moron. For the love of god, the best you can do is list statues that require maybe that parents could if they wanted to submit tests? Then wildly handwaive that they all do? Jesus you are stupid. I mean rock fucking stupid. Not ignorant, mind you, we all know what were working with there, but actually incapable of simple deduction. It''s quite amazing.

Anyway:

Vermont (aka North West Massachusetts)
Massachusetts (the workers paradise)
New York
Rhode Island (aka South Massachusetts)
Pennsylvania
and......
wait, really? That's all of them? It includes two of the smallest states by both area and population?

Jesus.

Wait, what's that in relation to the US population, NY is a big state, right?

RI and VT average less than a million each, but let's be generous and say 2 mil there.
Worker's paradise a little under 7 million, so let's make it 9. Hell, let's make it a round 10.
PA, about 13 mil. NY about 20 mil. So, let's say 43 million. Out of 315 million. Wow, that sounds just horrible for your case. Let's round generously, eh? Let's say 50 million out of 300 million. That sounds better, right? 1/6th. That's just like "most". Isn't it?

Hey guess which states have the smallest percentage of home schooled kids! I'm just kidding you don't really have to guess. It's PA...NY...VT...

You get the idea. Wait, you're an idiot, you probably don't. At any rate, MAYBE 10% by the most wildly generous estimates of homeschooled kids take standardized tests. Of those, about 5% (of the 10%, not half) report scores to state agencies.

TL/DR. Wrong again, keep guessing. You're bound to get one right eventually.



That alone is pretty telling, right?

Yes, it tells us that no one makes any money selling "send your kids to public school" materials. There really isn't much of an "anti-homeschool" movement extant in the US. I'm sure you've been informed that teachers unions, in their abundant spare time when they finish dealing with organized crime and hurting students are against the concept, but really they don't much care. They certainly aren't spending much money on it.

Edited, Sep 10th 2014 11:30pm by Smasharoo
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 332 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (332)