Re: was:Re: Clarification of a message: now: rebellion and m...

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/23/2007 8:45:55 PM Central Standard Time,

Ladyshrink111@... writes:

> Unless they're going to be involved in some kind of totally solitary work,

> they have to learn to deal with people.

>

This implies that homeschooled children are solitary. I have not found this

to be the case. With my daughter it is the opposite. When she was in school,

our evenings were tied up with trying to teach (via homework) all the things

they were introducing but unable to do so in school. Seemed each evening was

the same ole thing....the horrible experience of trying to conform my child to

a curriculum that was not appropriate for her in content or pace, bathing and

supper and preparing only to do it all again the next day. Our lives were

dominated by the school. Her first year out I signed her up for THREE dance

classes which she loves, an art class, church choir and eventually homeschool

bowling and roller skating (county group). We had more time to be more involved

in

life but in the activities WE choose. She does better socially now because

her activities are in shorter spurts where she can be more successful at

controlling her behaviors.

**************************************

See AOL's top rated recipes

(http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/24/2007 6:38:02 PM Central Standard Time,

AndyCutler@... writes:

> some reasonable exposure to

> how things work is wise.

>

I think the key work in this sentence is " reasonable " . When people learn I

homeschool, their first reaction is usually " hey, the kids got to learn how the

real world works and how to handle different people, etc. " The failing in

that argument is to think that a person of age SIX is capable of navigating

those waters. Most of the time children do not have the tools to understand

and

discern about much of what they face in public schools and are merely EXPOSED

to it. The ironic part of this equation is that we first expose our children

to so much of the very things we then spend the second part of their childhood

telling them to eliminate from their lives such a foul language or toxic

friendships. I am 45 and I have taken a lifetime to learn one of the best

things

I can do for myself is to keep my friendships and relationships clean and

healthy and even my TV choices are self-censored so that I am careful what I am

exposing MYSELF too. Why in the world would I want less for my own child?

Please do not be offended to those who are in public school. My family for as

long as I can remember have all gone to public school until now. But it's a

real

sore spot for me when a reason for sending them is to expose them to

everything we don't in their lives. AHHH

**************************************

See

AOL's top rated recipes

(http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)

[Guest guest]

Merry Christmas!

Maybe this is why noone should go to public school.

Noone suggested anyone put a 6 year old in an inappropriate placement, we pulled

our 4 year old out of public school kindergarten, after two weeks and put her in

private school when we realized her entire school was attempting some kind of

whacked out experiment with social amoralism (nothing right or wrong, not

cheating or lying or hitting). Ironically, I notice with the dgd that they are

now teaching social skills and character development in a pretty serious

way....so the experiment must have failed, this is stating the obvious.

But I have seen more than a few homeschoolers whose parents thought they were

preparing them for the world with a few art or music classes with other kids and

what happened to them when they were forced to face the world was not good. And

they are all forced to face the world, I don't like it either.

Unless parents are planning on living forever or you live in a commune

(beginning to think this is a good idea) or cult where your child will have

constant supervision forever, somewhere about the age of 12-13, they must have

some exposure to other people, yes even the bad people, while the parents are

still around to help them navigate through the maze of substandard human

development. There is no scarier time in a parents' life but it's part and

parcel of helping a child grow to an adult.

Re: [ ] was:Re: Clarification of a message: now:

rebellion and m...

In a message dated 12/24/2007 6:38:02 PM Central Standard Time,

AndyCutler@... writes:

> some reasonable exposure to

> how things work is wise.

>

I think the key work in this sentence is " reasonable " . When people learn I

homeschool, their first reaction is usually " hey, the kids got to learn how

the

real world works and how to handle different people, etc. " The failing in

that argument is to think that a person of age SIX is capable of navigating

those waters. Most of the time children do not have the tools to understand

and

discern about much of what they face in public schools and are merely EXPOSED

to it. The ironic part of this equation is that we first expose our children

to so much of the very things we then spend the second part of their childhood

telling them to eliminate from their lives such a foul language or toxic

friendships. I am 45 and I have taken a lifetime to learn one of the best

things

I can do for myself is to keep my friendships and relationships clean and

healthy and even my TV choices are self-censored so that I am careful what I

am

exposing MYSELF too. Why in the world would I want less for my own child?

Please do not be offended to those who are in public school. My family for as

long as I can remember have all gone to public school until now. But it's a

real

sore spot for me when a reason for sending them is to expose them to

everything we don't in their lives. AHHH

**************************************

See

AOL's top rated recipes

(http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/26/2007 9:12:20 AM Central Standard Time,

the.great.zambini@... writes:

> It was meant to address that, and the fact that

> many take up the illegitimate chant that......

I must concur that I do this also...I will respond to a general topic, fact

or opinion, completely seperate from the poster. Regardless of our various

stances on education or religion, etc. we are all a cohesive unit in the fight

against mercury poisoning so we find unity there.

**************************************

See AOL's top rated recipes

(http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/29/2007 10:01:06 AM Central Standard Time,

danasview@... writes:

> Another idea that was VERY helpful, is that

> one day #3 found the closed-captioning button on our VCR [my kids

> don't watch TV except for videos], and he turned it on. I was about

> to turn it back off when I noticed #2 reading the captioning. This is

> what started him reading, because he could *hear* the dialog and *see*

> the words at the same time, then followed by the computer programs.

>

Dana I had the exact same experience with my daughter. She stuggled for

years with reading in public school because the words had no meaning for her.

Edmark reading program helped some with that but it only goes to 2nd grade. It

was when she came home and we set the closed captioning on her favorite DVD's

that her reading took off!!

Looks like you have a lot of experience with selecting a curriculum. I'm

looking for early elementary history and science on about the 3rd grade level.

Any suggestions? Please feel free to email me privately.

Kristi in Alabama

**************************************

See AOL's top rated

recipes (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)