Thursday, May 28, 2009


There needs to be some financial perks for successfully homeschooling your kids. Parents voluntarily taking strain off the public school system to educate their own children.

There should also be some perks for parents who pay for private schools. Again, the choice to put children in private education leaves more resources in public system.

Why not a tax credit equal to approximately 1/2 of what it costs to put the child in the public education system for parents that go another route?


Emmy said...

Good idea, though I personally don't know if I could ever home school my kids. I am impressed with those who can.

Adam & Kristen Birkmeyer said...

Yes, please.

Melissa said...

AMEN!!! I have been researching curriculum for next fall for Jane. Holy Cow it is expensive. And I want to do it right. It is worth the cost for her education and the emotional/self esteem reasons we aren't doing public school for her. I have been trying to find grants, beta testing, and other ways to cut the costs, but yeah it isn't going to help our budget. At all.

I keep thinking, there has got to be $$ somewhere in this state set aside for home schoolers, but I can't find it to save my life. I even begged my favorite choice of curriculum providers... pathetic, but a mom does what she has to.

Steve said...

I have mixed ideas about home schoolers. Most I have met, both parents and children, seem to be 'a tad off'. I don't mean any disrespect b/c I know there are a couple of your readers that do this and probably even some people that do/were that are perfectly fine. But most of them seem to have more problems adapting to change and social situations. Not to mention a lack of close friends away from their parents, which can only be accomplished by spending 8 hours a day or so around and sharing similar experiences in class and with teachers and sports. Plus, as smart as I am, hahaha, I do know there are certain aspects of education that I am lacking in that the public system will cover more thoroughly than I could ever hope to (biology, chemisty, art class...).

As for the credit, I think it would be ok for homeschoolers, but worry it would encourage greedy parents and possibly low-income parents to take the money as opposed to giving their children a quality education. I don't think going to a private school should get any assistance, credits or vouchers, b/c then again, you'd only encourage people to choose the most expensive schools (many which are more than most of us paid for our colleges per year). Not to mention over burdening these systems, thus probably making it even harder for most people to get into the private schools, the ol'supply and demand problem. If you don't like your school district, a lot of places allow you to pick another one and you can always move. The school district system is one of the more negative consequences of our federalist history.

Valorie said...

This is a tricky situation. I live in an area where the public school system is seriously lacking. I have friends that homeschool, and do it the RIGHT way (let's face it, there are just some lazy people out there and their kids suffer from their mistakes). I also have a lot of friends who can afford to send their kids to private school. Some of them choose private because they feel their kids will get a better education and others choose it because of their religous beliefs.

My experiences with people taking their kids out of the public school system is exactly the OPPOSITE of what you are proposing. I find that because so many people who care about the welfare of their child's education remove them from the system, there are fewer people willing to fight for reform. I live in an area where race is still a major factor in policy making and it stunts the reform we so badly need.n We need as many people as possible to fight for change.

In short, I think the changes need to come within the home, NOT the school system. Children who are supplemented at home make far greater progress than those who are not. Sadly, all too many parents put the entire burden on the teachers. I think that's really where the problem lies.

Salt H2O said...

To reform public education, we have to take on the teacher's union, and that's NEVER going to happen.

My proposal is pretty straight forward if it takes $10 to educate a child and a parent chooses to take that load upon themselves, for what ever reason, they receive $5 back and the school system retains $5 though they are not educating the child.

All involved benefit- the school still recieves the funding with out the strain of another body in the seats, the parents have the child educated the way they like-
if you can find a flaw with that logic, I welcome the discussion.

Salt H2O said...

To avoid the lazy parent issue- with this funding comes nationalized testing for homeschooled kids, if you want the tax break you kids have to pass the testing.

If they don't pass- you have to put the kids back in public school.

Meredith said...

Interesting! My sister is considering home schooling her kids. I thought she was crazy because public education would be like free babysitting to me. But if there were perks to home schooling my kids, like a tax break, then I would definitely look more into home schooling.

davers said...

Sorry, Steve, you probably get sick of me, but I just can't seem to let your assertions go unchallenged when they seem so challengeable.

Sure home school kids might be different than public schooled kids, but I think your branding them as "a tad off" might be more suitable in describing today's public educated kids compared to public educated kids just 30 years ago.

In fact, they aren't just a "tad off". They're way off. Test scores in the toilet, curriculum vastly different, objectives (pass everyone) whacked, etc. Home-schooling is closer to what our nation's leaders received and THEY seem to be doing okay with what they've learned. It's the public school system that is now "off".

Of course I should qualify my comment as coming from a parent who's kids are mostly public school system. I am in fact a public school fan, and for that reason I have multiple doubts about subsidizing non-public schooling, but nothing's black and white and I agree with Kory on this one (I know - "go figure", great minds and all that).

Admittedly many home schooled kids have traditionally seemed deficient at least socially and sometimes in other ways, but in many (if not most) cases such kids are home-schooled precisely because they were perceived as being a "tad off" by their public schools peers, and suffered as a result in a hostile environment (kids can be ruthless). It's a chicken and egg thing ... just because they're different doesn't mean home schooling did that to them. Likely they'd be even more reclusive if forced into a public school system. One size does not fit all - especially when it comes to education.

But assuming you're right that Home Schooling made them "off", and I'm convinced you aren't (no offense), we still live in the US where parents, not the state should be in charge and that dynamic, which is ever more increasingly at risk. The practice of divorcing kids from their parents seems an ever more increasing strategy in in state sponsored education philosophies. Parents in many cases are not even allowed to participate or even know what's going on with their kids in school. That's Orwellian.

To carry that further, intentionally keeping the financial playing field disadvantageous for home-schooling with the specific intent to promote state-run indoctrination for socialized cookie cutter kids ... (that is what it seems you're proposing) seems even more Orwellian, don't you think? Next we'll be mandating blond hair and blue eyes. This is bordering on becoming a constitutional issue.

I also don't think you can compare yesterday's home-schooling programs to what's available today ... IF YOU CAN AFFORD IT (which is why I believe at a minimum parents should be able to direct where the funds go if they cannot get the funds themselves). The K13 program is awesome as are others, and the interactivity through the internet and learning tools on the net and via computers are vastly superior to what was available just 5 years ago. You are going to see a new crop of home-schooled kids within the next few years and they WILL knock off the socks of public educated kids.

Valorie said...

I'm not completely opposed to your proposal. However, I would rather see funding go towards homeschooling over private schools anyday.

If the kick-backs to the parents were to come in some type of voucher form (to purchase supplies, books, etc.) instead of an actual check, it may be more successful overall. Let's face it, people are greedy and many times put the welfare of their children below that of the almighty dollar.

In some areas of GA (where I live), parents can actually opt to homeschool through the public school system. All curriculum and supplies are sent directly to the child's home. They must be tested every year and meet the same standards that kids in traditional school do. Many of my friends who are concerned with the environment their kids attend school in (ie: influence of the kids, not the teachers) have choosen this option and have loved it. I would like to see other states adopt a system more like this. Checks and balances would have to be in place, but I think it could be very successful.

The main reason I oppose additional funding for private school is because they do not always demand the same certification that public schools do. You never know if the person teaching your child actually has a teaching certificate or not. I've had personal experience with this.

No matter what your position on school reform, I love that you have thought this through and are concerned about this issue. This topic deserves more time and debate than it is given!

Chanelle said...

My son is currently in a public school, but I homeschooled before this semester and plan to start again in the fall.

And I liked your idea until you stated that homeschoolers must pass a test or be put in the PS system. Who will determine what is on the test? And how in depth will it go? And will it just follow the thinking that everyone has to know the same things? So basically my question is will the parents have to teach all the exact things that a school does so the kid can pass the test? I don't agree with it if that would be the case and, to be honest, I wouldn't even bother with homeschooling then. It is super hard and trying and if I have to create what the school system is already great at, then I'm not going to waste my time.

I homeschool because I want my child to have a different education. I want him out in the world learning from real books and real life, not from text books and his peers. A great person learns how to deal with life by experiencing it first hand, not from a text book that leaves out all of the important stuff. Or from a classroom that doesn't teach the Constitution or how to be great leaders.

The school system has been set up to create workers that will do what they are told. I'm looking to create leaders that not only believe what they stand for, but have the guts to stand for what they believe in.

So I am more then willing to not have a tax break if it means that I have the freedom to decide what a true education is. Like a solid gospel education and a life full of service. That will create better leaders for our future. The details of math, science and literature go hand in hand with this, but how much of the truly important things (gospel learning) do our children really get?

(Did you know that our former prophets asked members to not enroll their children in the PS but keep them in the church academies. But, because the PS was free and the church academies cost money, and the saints were hard pressed, they put them in the PS. The church academies were closed by the 1920's)

So, I don't want your money if it means I don't have freedom ;) (But, just like our great founding fathers I would be open to creating something that worked for both sides.)

OH~ and about being "a tad off." If it means that my children clothe the naked, feed the hungry, care for the widow and orphans, and at the same time make life better for their family and neighbors then I am proud to be "off!" Honestly, it makes me smile when people tell me that my 8yo is so kind and considerate and that he made them, adults, feel important! I just pray that I'm doing what is right ~ because it is super hard and I get bashed all the time.

Okay ~ I'll get off my soap box now ;) But, thanks for bringing this up though ~ I sometimes wish I could keep some of the money I give to the schools. Books and trips are not cheap!

Allie said...

I'm a little conflicted on this, because while I think a parent definitely should be able to educate their children in whatever manner works best for them, I'd worry that encouraging with a monetary incentive to homeschool or go to private schools WOULD end up hurting the children in public schools.

Generally, the parents who would be most likely to take advantage of such a tax credit are the ones who are already involved in their children's education. They're the ones who volunteer at the school, who petition the school board or elected officials to change things that aren't working. Take them away, and the children at public schools loose their most vocal advocates.

I have a friend in colorado who is seeing that at his daughters school- the higher achievers are leaving to go to private schools, the average test scores at the public schools are falling, and (if I understood what he said correctly) because of NCLB, the schools in his district are facing losing more of their funding.

I agree with you that the teachers union is a mess, makes it nearly impossible to fire bad teachers, and needs to go.

Sherpa said...

I'm conflicted about it. I see public education as a common good, and home schooling as a "luxury tax." Yes, I agree the public education system is broken, and needs to be fixed. However, I don't think vouchers or koryeducation is the way to go. I dont think we should be taking money out of the public school system or dumping money into it per se---I think there's other ways to go about reducing the cost of homeschooling and charter schools.
As for homeschool, I'm not against it. Homeschooling can be a great system, and it can be lousy. It depends on the parents really. Some kids do better homeschooled, some don't. A lot of kids who are homeschooled grew up in families that are on the fringe-and some did not.
Personally, I probably would've been better off in a Montesorri program in Elementary school, and if my kids show some of the same traits I have, I'll consider other alternatives. That being said, even though I went to State Schools during the whole of my education, it wasn't like school was my only form of education. I believe strongly that education starts in the home, and is the responsibility of parents and the children.

Steve said...

Valorie is spot on here. As far as I know, I thought MOST states have some sort of annual test that homeschoolers had to take, at least in the states where I have lived and have family.

Sherpa is also right that taking money OUT of the public system, which is already grossly under funded, will only make one of the great things about a civilized society only worse.

I agree with Davers as well that there needn't be a one-size fits all and that ALL parents should be involved with the education of children. For instance, I don't understand why Chanelle, you can't supplement what your child learns in PS with what you feel is more important. They your child will have the best of both worlds, book learning and real world. I agree that we can't rely 100% on the PS system, nor were we ever supposed to! Teachers don't make enough or have enough resources to do that. Nor do parents! That is why it should be a team effort.

I'm curious, countries like Japan, China, Sweden, and other highly developed education countries DESTROY our kids in testing. I wonder how much, if any, of their system allows for homeschooling or requires MORE parent involvement at home. I know most countries, even 3rd world ones, already have year round schooling, which is something we need as well.

Bottomline, you have the right to pull your kid out and take responsibility for its education, but you also have the responsibility to give them an education to not only be 'smarter' beyond being nice, spiritual or having her memorize the People's History of the United States(!), but also to be intelligent enough to go to college to get a good job, be a productive member of society, and mix well with peers.

Salt H2O said...

i'm really confused about one thing:

Why is everyone talking about taking money out of the public education system? And getting all touchy feely about public v private v homeschool? This is why we need Romney, he understands this complex math.

I'm a numbers person but I really didn't think it was that complex:

It costs 10 dollars to educate Jill. Jill has autism and her parents would like to enroll her in a special school. Instead of enrolling her in public schools they find a school that meets her needs. In their taxes the get $5 back.

That $5 doesn't come near what it costs to educate Jill, but makes up the gap in the parents paycheck to make special education possible.

The school was going to be spending 10 to educate Jill, but just recieved 5 not to educate Jill. It now has 5 dollars MORE than it had before.

Say this happens for 100 students- that's $500 more for the public school system to utilize. That's 100 less students in their seats but 1/2 of the money still there funding it as if they were in their seats.

Please show me where my numbers are wrong and I'll agree but if you can't prove my math bad- it's a good plan.

Salt H2O said...

As for the standardized testing, not all states are compliant.

I have 2 nephews in Kentucy that were 'homeschooled' that are 20 years old and still haven't graduated from highschool. Their 7 sibilings are doomed to poverty thanks to their parents disinterest in their education. It's tragic, but totally legal.

Salt H2O said...

I feel like I need to spell this out one more time:

Two Public Schools School A and School B:

All of the kids at school A decide to find a different means of education- it doesn't matter what because it's the parent's decision as to how the child is educated. None the less all the kids of school A leave.

School A still receives funding as if 1/2 of the students are still there, permitting over crowed school B to move a portion of it's students to school A- utilizing the facilities and educators.

School B suddenly has smaller classes and better facilities.
School B's students are now using School A's building and school A's teachers. The student to teacher ratio is decreased because it's receiving funding for 1/2 of school A but none of the kids from school A are there.

School A's parents can customize their children's education as they deem fit, as long as it is compliant with state regulations.

Seriously- where is the problem here?

Rachel H said...

So many good comments here!! Davers and Chanelle are RIGHT ON!

I am someone who NEVER in my LIFE imagianed I would be a homeschooling mom. I believed all the sterrotypes. But I have found that sometimes honestly God has a different plan. We have felt divinely led to taking our daughter out of what's considered a good public magnet school, for NURMEROUS reasons...much to lengthy to discuss easily here.
Read HERE a fabulous article called 10 Reasons why I homeschool, by Greg Sherman,Ph.D.

That being said, I do know there's a small percentage of religious-zealot-type of homeschoolers...who probably are a little EXTRA off. But hey, it's a free country!

When thinking about the idea of a tax credit, one thought that came to my mind was, maybe the tax credit could encourange others to consider homeschooling...which would need 1 parent home to do so, thus creating more families with 1 stay at home parent...another benefit!

While I think of what we will be doing this fall as home schooling, it actually is a virtual online public charter school. So, in that case, I might not qualify myself! At our virtual school, we will get all our materials for free, so we are not paying for our quality curriculum.

Obviously, since this is something we are reasearching a lot of lately this topic was if interest to me!

Rachel H said...

Sorry for the typos! I don't want you all thinking I can't spell now!

Cameron said...


The only issue with your example is that of fixed costs like buildings etc. The child and her cost might not be there, but that school is still paying for the building and any overhead associated with it. So it wouldn't be as large of an immediate savings.

Where the savings would come in big time though is with future growth. The public system would no longer be faced with paying for the construction of so many more new buildings.

Utah tried to pass this very thing, but it failed miserably largely because "voucher" became a boogeyman word.

As far as koreyeducation hurting public schools because all the "good" kids and their parents would leave the system, it's because the system sucks. And frankly, it could use a few thousand less students in it. Utah just spent tens of millions of dollars to lower class sizes, but because of growth they didn't lower it at all.

Bottom line, small class sizes are huge in the development of students, particularly early on. But states don't have the money to do it. Every penny of Utah income tax goes to education, and we can't make a dent in class sizes. And we have no way of paying for the buildings that we're going to need in the near future as more kids enter the system. Koreycare would go a long way towards fixing that problem.

Steve said...

Cameron is right with the math. Plus, public schools DO benefit from volume. The sunk costs are already there, the bus system, the education costs, the team sports, etc. Think of it like doing your grocery shopping; Costco is a better deal b/c you can cover more things (kids) with $10 than you could buying them individually at the local grocery (homeschool). The school has an overall budget that is more or less irrelevant to the # of students there (building, electricity, heat, bus, teachers, principles, admin, etc.) until the number of students is TOO much as he pointed out for Utah. If you start filtering away local taxes, which is how a lot of states pay for schools (property tax in VA) back as tax credits, then the school's budget decreases and all the kids lose, even if your kid wins. What is good for one isn't good for society.

Also, have you ever been to a PTA where you start talking about moving kids to different schools, especially when your local taxes pay for X school and they want to send your to Y!?!??! It makes Prop 8 look like a quiet discussion.

Salt H2O said...

All I read was sunk costs, touchy feely societal good blah blah. Numbers man! As long as we stick to numbers here and not theory we'll be fine.

I'm with you on the sunk costs- you just don't incorporate the sunk costs into the equation of what it costs to educate a child.

You're right, the problem is our kids are getting taught in a costco environment 35+ kids in a classroom. Reduce the kids, maintain the funding.

Chanelle said...

Steve ~ I do supplement, but there isn't much more I can add when my second grader comes home with 1 1/2 hours of homework plus large monthly projects (I don't remember doing this much when I was eight ;) ), has his normal small chores to help around the house, eats dinner and then gets ready for bed. Plus, he's been at a desk all day and wants to play with his friends so there is another hour for that. So that really doesn't leave much time in the weekday to do all that I would like with him. When we homeschooled we were able to get everything done plus more by 3pm ~ which meant no homework and more time for himself (which everyone needs).

And yes, numbers are important, but they don't tell the whole story. The truth is is that just because you offer people a little money back doesn't mean that they will be inclined to choose an alternative education. Most people have no interest, not enough money, or the time to do it and $5 (since that is the example number) wouldn't make it that much more rewarding. You might get a couple more students out of the school, but you won't get the numbers that you were hoping on because you are betting on just numbers and not theory.

For example, my husband works at an oil refinery as a mechanic and is constantly being told by the engineers that 1+1=2 because that is how it just plain works. But, my husband knows the hands on, or theory, and also knows that it is only relative if 1=1 as we understand it. (think Einstien's relativity theory) So even if the engineer says it will work there is many times it won't because he only understands the numbers and not the theory.

So with my over worded, lengthy response I'm trying to say that even though your numbers look good, it normally doesn't work the way you want it to and would only really help the ones that are already using alternative education. It just might end up hurting the schools because the majority of people (at least in my area) are very pro-PS and it would then remove more money from the schools, without lessening the number of students, then you had anticipated.

nrthshore said...

You want to talk numbers. That is just swell if you are talking about your own numbers.

When it comes to wanting to maintain some control over your life, you don't let any part of the government get involved. Then the gov. can exercise some dominion over what you do with those numbers.

What you are considering assumes that you would maintain control over the education your child receives. Not so. The contributor will exercise dominion and that is usually unrighteous. The giver (the gov.) is the one you are now beholding to. And the gov. seems to like to mettle, especially lately.

Public schools have that problem. They receive money from the government and the gov. expects to tell them what has to be taught.

The only way to get the education you would like for your child is to not consider money in the equation at all. Do what you can to best assist your child's education that will get them out of those 13 yrs., with as little harm as possible, and on the way to completing the education in college. Never invite the government into the process.

nrthshore said...

ps your responsibility is to the child - not economics or the government or the school or receiving perks. Only you will know what is best for your family.

Very Good Topic

Salt H2O said...

I would agree if this was in the form of a voucher- but as it is a tax credit I disagree.

I will recieve a tax credit this year for having a child, that in no way means the government can now tell me how to raise that child. I recieve tax deductions each year for charitable contributions, but the government is not telling those charities how to run, especially not the religous charities. Tax credits are very different from vouchers.

And there does need to be some form of monitoring from the government as to the education of our children- as evidence by my relatives that have chosen not to educate their children under the name of homeschooling- letting a child's mind wither and die in the pursuit of choice and homeschooling is child abuse.

Giving a tax credit doesn't create another government entity, it's simply writing a bit of new tax law that would be incorporated into the the current tax system.

In addition this gives parents that may not have the financial means the ability to have choice. It's easy to talk about financial independence if it can be afforded- but there are many families who's children have special needs and cannot afford to use anything but the feable reasources the public education sector provides.

That is who would benefit from a tax credit- not vouchers.

I am against vouchers because of the reasons you stated above, but tax law is different.

Chanelle said...

Amen, nrthshore!

Salty ~ Yea, you are talking theory ;) You stated that there should be monitoring since your relatives ruined (I'm using it, not saying you used it) their kids. But, I will come from the extreme conservative side of the discussion and say isn't that what America is for? To make choices that fit your personal family? And isn't it wonderful that their kids aren't doomed to live in ignorance? They have the right to disagree with how they were brought up and make a change. No one is telling them they have to live that way.

I'm reading a book from the 1880's that stated that just because someone is born into poverty and ignorance it doesn't mean they have to live that way. They are surrounded by people and can ask questions and try to better themselves. Some of our best leaders were born to ignorant families.

Abraham Lincoln came from very poor circumstances. He raised himself above it and became a lawyer. But he lost all of his cases. Instead of wallowing in self pity he quit working and went back to personal study. After he felt he had the knowledge he needed he went back to work and succeed as a lawyer.

Your family members are not doomed, they are just making a choice that doesn't look good to you. But, that is your opinion. Are you going to punish the rest of society for an opinion? (Referring about what nrthshore talked about ~ once you take government money you have less choice. It really does happen this way.)

And the government does tell you how to raise your child. They make it very easy if you do what they want you to do, but they make it very hard to homeschool, homebirth, not vaccinate and make other personal choices (religion is right around the corner ~ watch what is going on with the Catholic church. And with social medicine right around the corner, too, you won't have a say about the health care of your own personal family members.) You have to be a very stubborn person and stand up for what you believe in to make choices that go against the main stream. Even then, with the laws changing so rapidly we might not be able to fight for it soon.

So, being a homeschooler, I would not want a tax credit if it meant more regulation. If I was to receive it because you felt I truly deserved a break, then I'd be more then willing to ;)

Salt H2O said...

The situation of my nieces and nephews is for another blog- but i hope with everything in me that one of their children will innately sense that there is a whole world outside of their farm, take it upon themselves to walk 15 miles (as there is no public transportation)to town to find a job (not that they know how to work), find a homeless shelter to live in while they're trying to gain employment. Then study for their GED at night while they're flipping burgers during the day.

But I'd prefer the easy route of their mother actually homeschooling their children or better yet, dragging herself out of bed by 7am so she can get them to the public school bus on time.

I believe children are endowed with certain rights as well, and just because a parent wants to exercize their right to be lazy that doesn't mean they get to exact that laziness upon their children's future under the name of 'freedom'....really touchy subject.

However, you and my mom (nrthshr)perfectly explain why I am against vouchers.

Tax credits are completely different. Tax code is nicely cut and dry. The government does not own me any more because I pay less taxes due to my deductions. I deduct the cost of gas for work- the government does not tell me I have to be driving a hybrid. I deduct the heating and electricty bills from my home office, the government does not tell me that I have to keep the tempurature at 80 in the summer and 60 in the winter if I want the deduction. What I propose is no different.

For those that are afraid that by paying less taxes the government will have more say in their lives the answer is simple: don't take the deduction or the credit. But give others who could use that extra income to give their children with special needs an alternative to public schools.

Give the mother who would like to homeschool her kids but can't due to having to work a full time job the option of doing so.

All this does is provide more choice by paying less taxes. If you don't want the tax deduction- by all means don't take it.

Allie said...

I think our public education system (at least in my school district) does really well with what they have.

I'm sure the PS system "sucks" for some, but that hasn't been our experience.

Melissa said...

I want to move to Rachel's State. That is the program I'm drooling over for Jane and just can't swing the $$... I'm not done yet though, I'll figure out a way. For Jane, the change in her personality over the past 2 months of being home with me has been so amazing to watch. It is like watching a butterfly come out of her cocoon. She is realizing what a special kid she is. Dave and I can't get over how much more "Jane" she is than the girl who went to public school all day... This is totally the right thing for her, right now.

Harris Family said...

Yes please!!!! I like this tax credit! You should run for office!!!

mj said...

This is a really interesting conversation. The idea easily makes sense for the parents with the special needs child, or the parents that really want to but could otherwise not afford to home school their children, but I still am not seeing how this is a win for the public school system. I just don't think there are that many people that would take their kids out of public school. So the tax credits just end up going to the people that have already removed their kids from public school and maybe a few more parents, but not enough. The public schools end up losing money per student resulting in some angry parents/voters. Sorry but I don't think this one will fly. Maybe you could do some market research and find that it would work in Utah.

On another note, Steve, my husband was home-schooled. You should meet him. He is an extremely well-adjusted person with great social skills (better than mine). People are always shocked when they find out. He claims that he used to be much weirder and home-schooling actually saved him. He's also very smart and got himself a Master's degree. So it is possible.

Cameron said...

"I think our public education system does really well with what they have."

Which too often isn't enough. The problem is that there isn't any more to give them.

"public schools DO benefit from volume."

But kids don't.

Allie said...

Before my son started kindergarten I looked all over for different schooling possibilities, had he gotten into a charter school (one that was supposed to be really good) he would have gone there.

I was really nervous about "public schools" (and yes, I know charter schools are public schools...), because I had heard from so many people how awful the public school system is.

He's had great teachers for 3 years now, and is thriving. Perhaps we're very lucky, but I don't know anyone whose children are struggling in the current system and who don't have other options readily available to them.

I'm just not sure things are as bad as we're constantly told they must be.

Liz Szilagyi said...

I may be a little late on this . . . but I need you to know that public schools DO NOT get a penny for your child when you choose to home school them or send them to a private school.

I repeat, public schools DO NOT get a PENNY for kids not enrolled in public schools.

So, what I'm trying to say is your suggestion is totally and completely flawed.

And I didn't read all the comments, cause my heart races too fast when people talk about public education (I've been on the bloodies scenes of the battle field). But I want to say AMEN to whoever said teacher unions need to go. And I belong to one . . . ironic I know. But they do need to go. I'm super liberal but unions are terrible.

Chanelle said...


If what you say is true, then why was $648.56 of my property tax sent to our local school district last year? Where did my money go if our public school systems don't receive a penny when I homeschool? If they didn't get it, I would really like it back!