It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Why you should take your children out of public schooling RIGHT NOW

page: 8
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in


posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 02:56 AM

Public schools are terrible i agree, op. But home schooling should be a last-ditch option. Home schooling is terrible when it comes to teaching children how to socialize with other children their own age, and it creates socially awkward zombies.
reply to post by thepainweaver

I hate to hear you call anyone "zombies". When you do that, it implies that they are less than human, you turn them into objects. That is a dangerous thing to do. History has many lessons as to what happens when we find it acceptable to label and treat people less than human. I can understand why kids who grow up in public school see life-long home schooled children as peculiar. But understand, they see you the same way. If we really want a happier world to live in we need to stop hating people just because we don't all think alike or agree. I hear a lot of rumors about killing certain types of people, violence has never brought about peace, only more misery and suffering. People need to stop listening to those who look to shed blood or provoke anger. That's of course, just my opinion hun. Sorry, I'm preachy, It just breaks my heart to see so much confusion...there has been so much damage already done, my heart sinks when I read stuff like that.

posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 03:14 AM

I think you are right but for different reasons. The schools programming is pushing one world culture, environmentalism, and all of that UN agenda 21 crap down your children's throats. It is to soften people up in order to socially engineer people, otherwise the system would definitely be more laissez faire with education rather than turn it into a day care so they can make both men and women work for ever diminishing amounts of money (when viewed at in terms of actual buying power). They have built a slave society, and for years they have been turning your children against you. If they don't get your kids that way, no worries, the system will just come up with more excuses with which they can use to take your children away; destruction of the family unit is high in the state's list of priorities.
reply to post by TheLastStand

Finally!! we are on page 7 or 8 now and you first to bring this out. Thank you! I posted a video earlier (published in the early 80's) in the thread that details what the education was actually doing even though they know it was illegal. I guess the point was that no one can stop them, and it's true, no one has been able to stop them. They already have successfully created two usable generations to do their bidding regardless of how gruesome it may be.

posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 09:18 AM
reply to post by Oland

Thank you for your replies. There's not much I can say about whether or not the schools you've worked in are run like prisons. But elementary schools tend to at least try to be creative, for the most part. But, again, middle school and high school is when that all goes out the window, especially in the poorest neighborhoods.

As far as not learning basic math, while you and a handful of students might be able to, most people can not demonstrate an understanding past 8th grade math. This bit of info was in one of the documentaries I posted a trailer for in the third or so post, I could watch it again to find the source if you'd like. Yes, they are "taught" it... but they don't learn it.

posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 09:53 AM
The following is a post about socialization:

Although non-homeschoolers worry that homeschooling may turn children into social misfits, we know that the opposite is true and that POSITIVE socialization is one of the best reasons to homeschool your children. During's 2005 Summer Teleconference I had the pleasure of interviewing Diane Flynn Keith and we openly talked about the socialization issue.

"Socialization is actually meant to prepare children for the real world, which means learning to interact and deal with people of all ages, races, and backgrounds," says Diane Flynn Keith. "In this case, homeschooling actually does a better job of this because homeschoolers spend more actual time out in society."

Research supports this. According to Home Schooling and the Question of Socialization by Richard G. Medlin, "Home-schooled children are taking part in the daily routines of their communities. They are certainly not isolated; in fact, they associate with--and feel close to--all sorts of people."

He continues, "Home schooling parents can take much of the credit for this. For, with their children's long-term social development in mind, they actively encourage their children to take advantage of social opportunities outside the family. Home-schooled children are acquiring the rules of behavior and systems of beliefs and attitudes they need. They have good self-esteem and are likely to display fewer behavior problems than do other children. They may be more socially mature and have better leadership skills than other children as well. And they appear to be functioning effectively as members of adult society."

This and other studies support the irony of the socialization issue in homeschooling that we have known for years, which is that traditional schools are actually more on a path of de-socialization. In traditional schools students learn to stay in a class to which they've been assigned and are grouped according to age and academic level, and generally with students from the same geographic area and socio-economic background.

So in a sense, as I like to say, many people are homeschooling because of socialization reasons.

During our discussion, Diane Flynn Keith agreed that traditional schools are not conducive to socialization and in fact, that students are actually punished if they try to socialize in the classroom.

She shared this ironic story, "I recall distinctly that my son spent a great deal of time in the classroom in the first grade, with his head down on his desk because he wanted to talk all the time to all his little friends around him and the teacher kept saying 'We're not here to socialize, young man.'"

The structure and reality of traditional schools are teaching students to be passive and compliant, which can follow the children throughout life. Children can learn to take abuse, to ignore miserable bosses or abusive spouses later on. In a traditional school someone else usurps authority.

This is where homeschooling comes in. Kids in homeschooling develop self-confidence and self-esteem; they learn to deal with difficult people when they are developmentally ready. When they are ready to go out into the world they know they have choices, a foundation developed in homeschooling.

Research conducted by Michael Brady entitled Social Development in Traditionally Schooled and Homseschooled Children, a Case for Increased Parental Monitoring and Decreased Peer Interaction endorses this idea. Brady states, "There seems to be an overwhelming amount of evidence that children socialized in a peer-dominant environment are at higher risk for developing social maladjustment issues than those that are socialized in a parent monitored environment."

In other words, socialization in homeschooling works better because children have more opportunities to be socialized through the modeling of good social behavior by caring adults rather than through peers, who do not know much more than they do. Parents give their kids the skills they need to interact with other people and also have the chance to protect their children.

So, the big question in homeschooling socialization is "Who do we want them learning life skills from? Caring adults, or peers who don't know any more than they do?"

"No," Flynn Keith jokes, "the REALLY big question is 'What about the prom?!'"

Prom and graduation are viewed as rites of passage, which are important parts of children's lives; however, they do not need to be activities organized by the state or a school. Many states and homeschool organizations have established proms and graduations for homeschoolers and a homeschooling family can create their own private way to celebrate rites of passage.

posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 06:17 PM

Originally posted by sirhumperdink
reply to post by Blueboyinheaven

well thats good to know can you please provide more information about the public school system in london?

(im pretty sure the topic is specifically about schools in the united states though and i can assure you the situation here is much different)

Hi I would be glad to,

The public school in London I attended is quite a famous one actually, I don't want to say the name of the school but It's in the Camden area and It has it's own Wiki page about it's history, most recently about a protest that happened in 2006 against the teachers and students which got well out of hand.

My experience in my Public school was a fair one with it's pro's and con's. Most of the teachers there were all foreign but speak fluent English and our school had a partnership with an American educational company which sends American Teachers to my school to train.

Before I left at Christmas I was also told by an ICT teacher that none of the ICT staff in my school or in fact any of the schools in Camden are qualified to teach ICT since it's a subject that is pretty much basic knowledge, though there are teacher training courses for it.

I'm Dyslexic and at my time from year 7 to year 12 (Sixth Form) at the same school I had my own helper and there was this special department called Curriculum support to help children with disabilities and such, they were very helpful and polite.

Now during my time at Sixth form I also had to travel to 3 other public schools for certain courses and I can also say they were of high standard, in fact you can search up Camden Ofsted reports on the Public Schools in the area and all of them are rated high.

Now my brother who attended a Theater school from year 7 to 10, the school was a private one which my parents had to pay about £10,000+ a year for him to attend, and he was pulled out due to the poor staffing and facilities. They never taught Science or basic Maths and the teachers were very abusive, the students were also bullies.

I hope that sheds some light on Public Schooling in London.

posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 09:15 AM

I've tried to stop posting and just lurk here, to avoid taking the bait on a number of topics that people seem to enjoy trolling with. However, this isn't a troll, and it's an area of personal expertise, so I have to jump in.
reply to post by Jiggyfly

What an interesting opener. I am glad you were provoked to join the discussion, it’s always good to get someone who has been in the system during part of the “crazy 20 years”. An administrator no less, May I ask you specifically what your responsibilities are as well as when you graduated?

Background: 5 years teaching experience (5th grade) in a couple of different districts, now an administrator in a suburban K-5 school with approx. 650 students. M.A in Elementary Education, M.Ed. in Educational Leadership, currently working on my Ed.D. in Curriculum and Instruction. I am, by no means, an expert on the home school debate. However, there are some fundamental issues regarding your stance on this that require correcting...which I feel qualified to discuss.

Yes, you certainly have the credentials to make me assume you should be, gratz on your hard work. So as to make sure I understand, are you have about 6 years of college, followed by 5 years of teaching in the classroom, and now you are education administrator, is that correct… and those other classes were approx. a single 40 hr. course? Please clarify, if I have misunderstood. I would enjoy very much to read any of your dissertations on educating children.

First and foremost, please drop the "proof" argument. There is as much or as little "proof" in terms of opinions, scholarly articles, and half-assed literature reviews to satisfy any stance on education you would like to take.

I am a little taken aback, I recall reading many opinions based on experiences. Are you saying that personal experiences and scholarly articles have little value? Are they not all scholarly works subject to a peer-review process that judges the quality of the research in order to be accepted?

May I ask what did you base any of your own research on to get the degree you have? As far as the half-assed literature comment… that’s not very nice…being in the educational field, one would think you would explain why a particular article is considered “half-assed” , give some supportive material to make your statement valid.

Is integrity not an important ethical precept? I am open for some clarification.

will find are studies commissioned by textbook companies (I'm looking at you, Pearson) to support a product. This product will likely change in 4 years, and a new, contrary study will be commissioned. This is not to say that you are incorrect in any of your statements, just watch your rebuttals.

Are you confirming that facts will change about every four years in these texts books? If this is true, doesn't that imply that about every 4 years the next students information will contradict the previous students information? I would love to get more detailed opinion from you on this issue.

However, there are some fundamental issues regarding your stance on this that require correcting...which I feel qualified to discuss. Proof is, sadly, either abundant or completely lacking (depending on your standards) for every stance possible

So, you are stating that in your opinion, there is no standard to evaluate the quality of “Proof”?
Like truth is in the eye of the beholder or something along those lines?

Second, teachers are underpaid in some locales, completely overpaid in others. Teaching can be a vow of poverty, or a 100k per 9 month job, depending on where you teach and how long you've done it.

Well since you brought the subject up, I am curious as to what is the average salary for your position in your area? I would also like to know how the amount teachers get in pay affects the teacher’s performance? I would suspect there is a connection since this topic is about the education and safety for the children.

You are right that quite a few teachers are unqualified, in that the 100k folks are usually the most out of touch, since their real study of the profession was done decades ago and it's been a crazy 20 years for educational theory.

Ah, so the better-paid teachers are “most out of touch”? Would you clarify, what you mean by crazy 20 years for education theory? I think we might be finding something in common here but, I would like you to clarify with an example or two so I can be sure I understand what you mean .

I will cont. in another post, thanks for your time

edit on 28-6-2012 by ScatterBrain because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 09:32 AM
reply to post by ScatterBrain

Salaries are a problem, to be sure, but not always in the way you spotlighted.

Nice statement, now the proper thing to do would be to follow that sentence with a proper explanation as to how or why you come to that conclusion. I don't mean to sound "rude" but for years parents have been asking for more information to understand the salary problem, and get little more than like what you just stated, care to elaborate for us?

Third, you do not have to go to college to learn to teach, true, but that teaching will be the exact same uninspired, inept teaching you criticize from the "underpaid, overworked" teacher.

Is this an opinion?

Real teachers study their craft every day, and collaborate with colleagues to improve their practice as part of their routine. It is embedded in everything that they do.

Interesting choice of words, will you elaborate? teachers who have accreditation? That piece of paper that says they completed the required credits that means they are capable teachers and can successfully teach?

However, excellent pedagogy is not the best benefit to lead, 'cause that's completely untrue.

I not only disagree, I do not think you will be able to supply with credible “proof” to support that statement, prove me wrong. In addition, I’m sensing a disconnect in regards to who is ultimately responsible for the upbringing of the child.

Most home schooling resources are the packaged models for instruction that weren't good enough to be sold to the districts

Really? You mentioned the questionable quality of the Pearson texts used in publically funded schools. Are you claiming that the public school texts are bad but the home schooled children buy the public schools rejected texts? Please support this statement with something that shows why these packets are of lower quality. You can't just make claims all day long when their is evidence that contradicts these statements.

Furthermore, most non-educational professionals have no idea the nuance in teaching a student, particularly a young student

Well, I am not concerned as much about “non-educational professionals”. It sounds like you are telling me that parents are not capable to teach their children. Are you telling me you do not know the history of Western education? I will be happy to share with you the facts (a thing that is known or proved to be true). No, charge either baby.

Do you know how kids learn to construct meaning from text?

Yes, if you would have viewed the video that I posted earlier in this thread, there is an example in there. Check it out; some of us older people are not as “out of touch” as you may think.


posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 09:40 AM

Math knowledge. Most kids do not have a basic understanding of math when they graduate. That's not because we don't teach it.
reply to post by ScatterBrain

What you just said is akin to me saying, “I am a professional car mechanic, I do my job, but I just can’t get those damn cars to run”.

Riddle me this batman, What would you say to the mechanic who you employ to fix your car, and when you come to pick it up, it is no better than when you dropped it off? Would you not take your car to some other repair shop? Don’t you think you should get your money back, since he clearly did not provide the service he claims to be qualified to do?

It's because the actual good ways of teaching it are often criticized and beaten into the ground because it does not resemble the methods used in the past.

Really? How many years now have the new methods been utilized? Officially, it has been over 21 years now. Why are we not seeing children learning?

Here's the punch line: Most of the Baby Boomers don't have basic math either. I can hear the counter argument now..."but, but, stupid teenagers can't even make change!"

Wow, how old are you, I sense a crying temper tantrum coming on any moment. Your facts are wrong.
Here is the punch line: our current president Obama is a baby boomer right? Many of our current leaders are baby boomers, are you implying that are country is being lead by a bunch of imbeciles?

You only learned to make change 'cause it was an integral part of your life, not because of effective math curriculum

That is adorable, explain to me how you can call it “effective math curriculum” when it has yet to be effective? It has been very ineffective as you admitted yourself.
Do you even see the error in your thinking?

However, many people actually think that the same people who don't recognize real answers when they see them are the best people to choose curriculum for their kids.

That is insane. Ok, I am just going to let everyone soak the statement you made, and remind them to scroll up and read your credentials again.

There are a great many indictments on public education that ring true. Indoctrination, mass production instructional model, social decay, wasteful spending, and all that. Numbers tend to back a lot of that up, depending on what you're looking at. I'm certainly no public education shill. I got out of marketing and into this to help, not because I thought it was perfect by any stretch. Also, homeschooling might very well be a viable, effective choice for a lot of families. However... 1. Proof simply does not exist in the form that you state for anything in this field. 2. Parents are not, by default, effective teachers. Objectivity and training are issues here. 3. Learning is a social activity. Homeschooling has to address that to work well.

I completely disagree with everything you have said here too, again, feel free to share how you have come to these conclusions. I have yet to see any evidence that you are qualified to hold a teachers degree, let alone hold a position as education administrator. I am looking forward to a educated reply to the questions raised here, thank you.

posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 06:26 PM
By all means, pull your children out of school. It's less of a burden on the school system so that other students who are in the system can get more attention and resources.

posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 02:08 AM
I had a VERY bad experience in elementary school. I stopped going to school after 5th grade, for circumstances beyond my control. Sometimes I wish I lived a normal life, going through High School and all... I have taught myself everything I wanted to know these past ten years, and I had all the time in the world to do anything I wanted. Granted, there are some repercussions of such a lifestyle (some that I'm still trying to get over)...

But really, what would I have gained from it, if I were "normal"? I would not be the person I am now. I would not know the same things. My destiny would be different. No matter how much times anyone says school is a good thing, I cannot bring myself to believe it. The quest for wisdom begins with ones self.

Sadly, every human being is different, and a good educational system is invaluable.

posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 04:11 AM
I have to say that, in speaking of socializing and public school, it's not always a good experience. To be completely honest, my time in school was absolute hell. The only thing that I learned in terms of socializing is that other people are judgmental, prejudiced, and have no problem treating others like dirt. I grew up a very shy person, and every year that I had to spend in school made it worse.

I am now 27 years old, and have such severe social anxiety that I cannot make a phone call, cannot answer the phone if someone calls, the only "friends" that I have were my husband's first, mine second. I have to always have a crutch when outside of my home. If I'm out with anyone except my husband, I have panic attacks when in a large group. I hate myself, and have ZERO self esteem. I am so extremely afraid that every single person out there is judging me that I cannot function in society AT ALL, because of my experience with other kids in school.

All of the above is because I had such a horrible experience in school. My "friends" in school treated me like crap, everyone else ignored me. The teachers didn't care that I was having trouble in class, and pushed me aside. In middle school I failed every single year, and had to take summer school just to make it to the next grade.

I am not an ignorant person. I was very intelligent, so much that in 5th grade I was spelling/reading at a college level, and could understand math problems that most others my age couldn't fathom. In 8th grade the second time around I had amazing teachers, and got all A's and B's, but only because the teachers gave me special attention and realized that I was ahead of what they were teaching.

What I'm getting at here is that being put into public school WILL NOT guarantee being successful socially. In fact, the way that kids are nowadays, the chance is that your child will either wind up socially stunted like me, or be taught to be an uncaring, disrespectful, little brat and fit right in. Either one, to me, isn't a very good outcome.

posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 04:28 AM

Originally posted by Numbers33four
Get them out before the teachers have sex with them.

The schools teach your kids to be dependent of government. To hate God. To be disrespectful to parents.

I know that schools are hell holes. There are a few good ones, but chances are that you cannot get your kid into one of those. Even then how do you know what they are putting into your kid's brain?

Throw your TV in the trash. Burn the illuminati garbage music cds.

Have no guilt when you abandon ship. Just be thankful that you got out.

Hell with all of the tax drones who worship the system.

The school I'm in has never taught anyone to hate God. In fact, in my English Lit. class, my teacher encouraged us to search for our own kind of spiritual truth. And while I agree with you about the government dependence, it seems like you want children to be dependent on religion, which is just as bad.

What would you classify as "garbage music CDs"? And what would you consider to be acceptable? I'm just curious, because your extreme views are quite interesting.

posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 01:53 AM

Before I go into sources and quotes, I want to tell you why I think everyone should homeschool.


Even people who have no children? What would they homeschool, and why do you insist they should do it, too?

posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 02:14 AM
The OP made a good list, but there are a few points that need to be addressed.

3. Public schooling teachers your children to perpetuate society's bad manners. They're taught that swearing, fighting and being a jerk is cool. They're not properly taught by overworked and underpaid teachers how to be polite, or how to care about other people.

I am not sure if schools officially teach that 'being a jerk is cool'. I think they learn it from the behaviour of the other kids, and female children's reaction to 'jerks'. Bullies are not punished, but victims of bullying are blamed a lot. Especially if they are male children. Boys simply do not have the right to complain.

But teaching how to be polite? That's teaching how to lie. That's teaching how to 'formulate behaviour' instead of expressing your finest self naturally.

Being polite is a form of fraud, it's a form of lying, it's a form of disrespecting other people. The best way to respect others is to give them HONESTY and TRUTH.

'Manners' are not something that a human being has naturally. It's learned behaviour, or programming. Are we robots, or are we free to express our own individuality? You just said in your list that students' individuality is not taken into account in teaching, but everyone is taught with the same mold in mind. Now you are suddenly reversing your thought, and WANTING people to be of the same mold - and that mold is called 'politeness'.

So which is it, do you want people to be individuals, or do you want them programmed the same?

You can't have it both ways. Either you are for individualistic, honest expression, or you are for programming people with the same mold. Politeness represents the latter.

4. Those children who do poorly in public school will never get proper help for it. They will be told to work harder without being taught how.

This part shows that you are not really going deep enough into the problem. Your statement implies that it's good to learn what they teach in schools, and that people need HELP to become moronic corporate slaves and automatons and herd-animals.

You do not realize that schools don't exist to help people become the best human beings they can be, to help them free themselves from artificial chains and to give them the basic knowledge, wisdom and understanding of the world and the Universe to really be able to express their finest self to it's best.

Schools exist to make bright, intelligent, creative, joyful children into dull, predictable, formulaic, robotic, automatons and slaves for corporations. They exist to make human being into a 'person', a dead entity that exists only on paper. They exist to brainwash people into fearing their fellow man and to trusting the corporations and governments, and to wash all their right values away, and implant bad and wrong values.

It's not MANNERS that should even worry anyone - it's the VALUES.

You fail to mention any of this in your post - and that worries me.

6. Public schooling leaves your children with very little time for play, which is NECESSARY for the growth and true education of younger children.

So if it wasn't NECESSARY for 'true education' (what the heck is THAT? That's like saying "true brainwashing"!), you wouldn't have a problem with children not having time to play?

How about older children? How about adults? Isn't play important for adults?

I think your values are a bit out of whack, if you have to base this argument about "play" on something like 'true education', and if are only concerned about 'younger children' (younger than who? How old is "younger" exactly?).

Play is important in itself. It's important for ALL humans, of ALL ages. Heck, it's even important for animals, even adult animals! Human beings are so much more than animals (though you wouldn't immediately realize it, if Earth humans was the only species you knew, that's how animalistic they have become), and thus play is way more important for human beings than animals.

I would say 'play' is at the very essence, the very core of what makes us human! And free time is important for everyone, especially for questioning the 'authorities' that try to take it away, and who implement psychological language, like 'shaming language' to do it. "You are not a man if you don't work", etc.

But no one ever says "You are not a human if you don't play", although this is much more true.

You have a relatively good list, and you are on the right track, and much of what you say is true, but some of your post is disappointing to me.

8. Public schools and their teacher unions make it impossible to fire a bad teacher. Yes, as close to impossible as one can get.

This is not as problematic as not being able to hire good teachers. I mean, if you could hire good teachers, why would any school ever hire a bad one? If most teachers are bad, however..

posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 02:24 AM
About the polite-thing again..

I think kids should be taught to not compete with each other, but to only compete within themselves. They should be taught to express their finest self in a honest way, and encouraged to respect others and to find a way to have good will towards everyone.

With enough respect and good will, why would there be need for faked behaviour, i.e. politeness?

Isn't a 'polite' individual nothing but a robot that sugarcoats his real thoughts, emotions, feelings and attitudes with something that's NOT real and NOT true?

You can hate someone's guts, but because of 'politeness', you will give them fake smiles and compliment their tie. What the fúck is that? Not genuine human behaviour. You twist yourself into a knot internally with 'politeness', when honesty and truth would set you free.

Anyone who can't deal with honesty, isn't fit to be around people anyway. I'd rather have a honest mean comment than a faked compliment ANY DAY.

Honesty doesn't mean that you have to constantly be telling people your opinions, of course. That's where respect comes into play. You can learn to respect other people even if they are wrong, and because they are divine spirits, created by our common Eternal Father, Great Spirit, whatever you want to call Him, they deserve respect.

Of course that default respect can be destroyed by people, or it can be expanded by them, but a basic respect for beings that are fundamentally divine creations, keeps one from using honesty as an excuse to insult people.

For example, a good rule is that if someone doesn't ASK for your opinion about something, and you think it stinks, you don't necessarily HAVE to say it out loud or tell your opinion about it to them. But if they ask for it, it's THEIR responsibility to take honest criticism gracefully. If they can't do that, they have no business asking your opinion.

No one should ever ask anyone's opinion just because they want a 'polite' answer, and expect praise, even though whatever they are asking about stinks. Such egomonsters SHOULD be put to their place, so they can learn some humility and common sense.

If everyone on this planet adhered to these simple suggestions, it would make the world a lot better place.

top topics

<< 5  6  7   >>

log in