|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday September 05, @01:30PM EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
This post reminded me of an article from Britain I read about a year ago:
http://www.observer.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,353 750,00.html
Here's the interesting bit:
[The study] discovered that home-educated children of working-class parents achieved considerably higher marks in tests than the children of professional, middle-class parents and that gender differences in exam results disappear among home-taught children.
Remember, in public schools girls get better grades than boys. The feminists/misandrists/left-wing liberals like to say it's because boys are dumber or more lazy and that there's nothing wrong with the schools. But it seems boys are capable of learning just fine and the real culprit is the system, not the boys.
(By the way, to access the article, remove the space between the 3 and the 7, for some reason the link is being corrupted by the software)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday September 05, @02:07PM EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
Not only do I support homeschooling, I don't even think we should have a public education system. State-run schools are communist and un-American.
However, there is one problem with homeschooling: In order to homeschool, obviously one parent must be at home to teach the kids. That means this parent (as it said in that op-ed, usually the mother) has either no income or only a part-time income.
I've read lots of messages from guys on here who don't even want to buy dinner for women on dates. There is validity to that. It's not fair for the man to be expected to pay all the time. However, the only way you can choose to homeschool is if you do "pay" most/all the time while your wife stays home and teaches, unless you let her pay all the time while you stay at home and teach.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday September 05, @02:12PM EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
The choice to homeschool does not fit in with someone who demands absolute, no-exceptions, communist-like equality in a personal relationship. No matter how you slice it, in a homeschooling household one parent is going to be totally or almost totally supporting the other on a financial level.
To me, this is yet another example of why equality doesn't work anywhere outside the legal system. If you try to apply it to personal relationships, and especially within families, familial love and loyalty is sacrificed in the name of making sure each spouse antes up exactly 44½ cents every time a roll of paper towels is purchased (and each partner uses exactly 50% of the roll, not one sheet over).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think I've ever seen anyone on this board advocate total 100 percent half-and-half in personal relationships. If you re-read the posts about paying for dates you'll see that the Dowd's column was about men paying for dates even when the woman is either making more money or initiated the date.
Likewise, I don't see anyone disagreeing that home schooling will probably require one parent to stay home, whether that parent is the mother of the father is up to the individual family.
We have at least one stay-at-home dad who checks this site regularly. There's not a damn thing wrong with it. I don't think you'll find many people here saying there is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday September 05, @02:28PM EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
> However, the only way you can choose to
> homeschool is if you do "pay" most/all the
> time while your wife stays home and teaches,
> unless you let her pay all the time while
> you stay at home and teach.
Why not have grandparents school their grandchildren? It used to be that retired and and elderly people would still contribute to society by mentoring young people.
Nowadays, all they seem to do is bitch and control local politics. Okay, so that's an unfair generalization, but I find it true too often.
Horatio
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
p.s. You seem to be reading a LOT of sentiment into our comments which is not actually there. Take a few breaths and re-read the Dowd article.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other obvious options are parochial schools, charter schools and private schools. Parochial schools generally have very modest tuition costs that could easily be offset by a dual income marriage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with you there, cheddah. My junior high and high school education all took place at a small private school run by the Church of Christ. While it may still not have offered me the greatest education available, I know now that it was much better than the education I had been getting in public schools. Of course, it was also heavy-handed on the religion.
When I started college, I actually found lower academic standards there than I had been used to in high school.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday September 05, @10:19PM EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
Retired? Can people actually still do that nowadays??? I'm not kidding. I can't even imagine retiring, anymore than I can imagine someday being able to breathe underwater. There's never going to be enough money for me to retire!!!! Being as the IRS says only 10% of the population earns at least $75k/year, I don't think I'm alone.
Okay, but if the grandparents are capable of retiring, yours is a good idea. It frees up both parents to work, while still providing stay-at-home parents and teachers for the kid. Why is both parents working so important? Nowadays, I don't think there are that many people who can afford to support a stay-at-home spouse and kid(s), even if they *want* to. That is a shame, because I think homeschooling is a wonderful thing.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
