Utterly Meaningless » Blog Archive » WELL, THEY BOTH HAVE “HOME” IN THEM

    Filed at 1:00 pm under by dcobranchi

    This piece out of Utah combines too completely unrelated school-y topics: educating homeless children and homeschooling. Bizarre. And as a bonus, we learn that we “cost” the school district $170,000. Why do private schoolers never have to put up with that canard?

    People that are looking for a new home don’t always know the different benefits between different homes like modular homes or steel prefab homes which is what makes housing resource sites so educational. Modular housing is getting popular because of the cost and their contemporary look.

    6 Responses to “WELL, THEY BOTH HAVE “HOME” IN THEM”

    Comment by
    April 17th, 2006
    at 2:04 pm

    “The superintendent of Absarokee’s schools doesn’t see the number as an anomaly, just a reflection of changing views in a small town. In bigger cities, he noted, they would probably go to a parochial school.”

    Ummmmm, NO, most probably would NOT go to a parochial school.

    *Why* is homeschooling always thought of as an “alternative” or “better than nothing” choice? For many families, and I would venture to say *most*, it is the perfect, highest level, first-class choice. And personally, I don’t even like to use the word “choice”–there is no “Plan B” for us. I’m sure at least some of those 38 families feel the same.

    Comment by
    sharon d.
    April 17th, 2006
    at 2:42 pm

    I’m sure it’s true that, even given an ideal parochial school, most hs’ers wouldn’t go there. On the other hand, when a local teaching order of nuns opened a 3-day-a-week private school with traditional Catholic education and very affordable tuition, I was surprised to see how many members of our Catholic hs’er support group immediately enrolled their children. In the Catholic hs’ing community, at least, dissatisfaction with the price and quality of parochial and diocesan schools seems to be an important reason for hs’ing.

    Another reason, btw, that it’s a canard that hs’ers are “costing” public schools anything. I don’t believe most Catholic or Evangelical hs’ers would have had their children enrolled in public schools in the first place. You can bet that lots of dioceses are very clear on the fact that hs’ing is “costing” them tuition money!

    Comment by
    Cindy B
    April 17th, 2006
    at 3:21 pm

    ” The primary reason many parents give to deciding to home school their kids is so they can incorporate religion into the lessons. But other parents made the choice so they can provide more oversight and attention for kids who might be having problems in regular public school.”

    So people home educate their kids for one of two reasons:
    a) religious
    b) problem kids

    Boy, that author sure did a lot of research! How many home educating parents did he interview, two?

    Comment by
    April 17th, 2006
    at 5:20 pm

    Oops…that was 38 *kids*–not families. Wonder how many families that represents.

    Comment by
    April 18th, 2006
    at 2:31 am

    I’m assuming they mean that the school district would have gotten $170,000 more from the state — that their total operating budget would be higher with the kids there. That’s obviously true, unless you’re in a state where you get less money the more students you enroll. Isn’t the funding issue why school districts are trying new tricks to get home educators to enroll their kids at least part-time? Why there are public schools operating online (like Ohio’s eCOT,) etc.?

    My sisters and I were home educated for educational reasons first, family reasons second, and religious reasons a distant third; we’re also not Catholic, and so we probably weren’t going to go to a parochial school even if one were available. On the other hand, I can say that there are at least a few home educating families that I know who’d love for a lower cost parochial school to open — usually they’re the ones who pulled their kids out because of an actual failing school, or because of a disruptive environment at school. And one of my best friends from high school probably would have been home educated, if her parents hadn’t found a great parochial K-8, and then a scholarship to a top all-girls’ high school nearby (her brother went to a Catholic all-boys’ high school.) Their parochial school did a great job, especially compared to nearby public schools. And it let her parents both work full time, which they enjoyed.

    Comment by
    April 18th, 2006
    at 11:29 pm

    A point of clarification:

    “And as a bonus, we learn that we “cost” the school district $170,000. Why do private schoolers (PS) never have to put up with that canard?”

    At least around here, independent–one kind of PS–, religious, (all-inclusive, from independent religious schools to parochial schools)–second kind of PS–, to for-profit, “back to basics” schools–third kind of PS– have enrollments that are very simple to count.

    The problem is, it is very difficult to track each child enrolled back to the child’s home school district. I’ve very familiar with one independent private school with an enrollment of about 120. There are *at least* 15 school districts represented.

    So this “costing the school district” meme is easy to grasp for homeschoolers, and harder to get across in the case of private schools.