How many homeschooling families are there on AFF?

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by jfrog

I'm not implying that is wasn't the right decision for your family MissB, I think it very much was.

However, I wasn't talking about parents not being able to teach all but one subject, I was talking about parents who might if they were lucky be able to teach one subject.

1. There would be much less interaction with the parents and more with the outsourcing so guiding them may prove to be just as difficult in this situation.
2. Flexibility would be limited due to having to schedule around when other people could help the child.
3. Personal attention would still be there to a much greater degree. Which is a very good learning environment, however NONE of our colleges are set up to give students that degree of personal attention. Will a child who is used to that attention and then all of a sudden cut off from it in college still be just as successful?

College is a completely different atmosphere from high school, so a high school setting doesn't do much to prep for that. However, I think you're assuming that by "one-on-one" attention I'm sitting and coaching my kids through every answer! LOL!! Hardly. Most of their material they easily master--the rest, I address like any other teacher should (although many don't)--I work on the problem areas until they're understood, and then we move on. Here's how it works: I teach; they work; if they have a problem, I re-teach until they get it. I don't allow passing grades of C or lower--because that means they didn't get 30% or more of the material. Any test that has a C or lower--we redo it until they get it. What kid has that advantage in public school? A test should be an evaluation tool--it tells the teacher where the weak areas are so they can be addressed. In public school, a test is just a test and whatever is made above an F sticks. That's a ridiculous approach. And the weak areas just continue to build up, culminating in broad failure in high school, and ultimately college. It's my job to make sure my children master the material they are covering. SO--regarding outsourcing--even if someone else is teaching a subject, I still have direct oversight to their mastery of the subject; I can make sure that they stick with it until they are getting good grades on tests, which means: They got it.

Also, in addition to personally supervising their success, I am available to arrange whatever is needed to enhance their learning process--trips to museums, to interactive exhibits, to hear a professional give a lecture, to science labs, etc. I'm not generically treating a group a students to the same learning experience--I am tailor-making a curriculum with enhancements for EACH student, according to their learning style and particular needs. NO public school does that, not consistently, and not effectively.

4. If you are having to outsource because you can't teach the material then supervision in academic areas becomes only slightly better than what a high school could do. It is still better though.

jfrog, you're making blanket statements that I don't think you've really thought through. The source of the curriculum/teaching is only one piece of a very large puzzle. Education isn't just about having someone who is *qualified* talk to your student about the subject, and then leaving it to them to master it. That is public education in a nutshell. Yes, there are some GREAT teachers in the public school system, but they are unfortunately constrained by stupid regulations, limited curriculum choices, and their creativity and interest often goes to waste.

5. High School's aren't positive and healthy atmospheres?

Absolutely not.