Home School or Public School?

Only a lawyer of TTH's incapability can look at that chart, and say it proves that private schooling and home schooling are failures, while government schools are superior. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

The numbers look pretty close to me.....public school numbers exceed or are quite close to private and home-schooled. I would have thought the private, catholic and home-schooled kids would have out-performed the public school kids by more significant margins given the pool.

when I got my MBA, the best quote the Prof said, Harvard, when you only accept the best you only put out the best Originally Posted by cptjohnstone

You're a Harvard MBA or did your professor at Central Oklahomo say that on your first day of rithmetic....

The numbers look pretty close to me.....public school numbers exceed or are quite close to private and home-schooled. I would have thought the private, catholic and home-schooled kids would have out-performed the public school kids by more significant margins given the pool. Originally Posted by timpage

Well said timpage.

I don't believe there's enough track record to prove any "trends" in home schooling, however.

Another question to be considered is why people choose to home school their kids? I can't imagine it's the kid's choice.

What about Bush Jr.? Originally Posted by jbravo_123

Or Obama, both Mr and Mrs?

Or Obama, both Mr and Mrs? Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

Hah yeah - see, both sides can come together and bash Ivy League graduates!

============================== =====

Again, the data for the report itself seems to be pretty limited. From the looks of it, it was only a study of the student population of a single midwest university whose name wasn't even given out. Hardly an extensive study or data pool, I'd say.

Only a lawyer of TTH's incapability can look at that chart, and say it proves that private schooling and home schooling are failures, while government schools are superior. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Only a fool could do otherwise. Only the relatively prosperous can afford either private school or afford to have one parent not work and home school kids. Public schools have to take on all comers, including the most economically disadvantaged students, special education students, disciplinary head cases, etc. Private schools cherry pick. It's obvious that the statistically insignificant advantages shown in the chart are greatly overwhelmed when you look at the radically different populations the three types of schools deal with.

Well, then, TTH, I suppose you support vouchers so that poor people can compete for spots in the private schools that, for now, only the rich can afford. It's nice to know you are on our side, for once.

Here is an update on public schools:

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/03/...s-cannot-read/

80% of NYC high school graduated cannot read well enough even for community colleges.

That says something very significant and disheartening about the NYC School System.

The whole voucher argument is bullshit and you know it. It's a device to enable angry people of non-color to get their kids away from the public school population and let taxpayers pay for them to do so.

It's a handout. an entitlement for sure. But when it's to help middle class people of non-color to put their kids in private (church) schools, it's a CONSERVATIVE right.

SNCK!

The whole voucher argument is bullshit and you know it. It's a device to enable angry people of non-color to get their kids away from the public school population and let taxpayers pay for them to do so.

It's a handout. an entitlement for sure. But when it's to help middle class people of non-color to put their kids in private (church) schools, it's a CONSERVATIVE right.

SNCK! Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

I agree with you Yssup Ryder - albinos deserve to be held hostage by the public schools, also.

Only a fool could do otherwise. Only the relatively prosperous can afford either private school or afford to have one parent not work and home school kids. Public schools have to take on all comers, including the most economically disadvantaged students, special education students, disciplinary head cases, etc. Private schools cherry pick. It's obvious that the statistically insignificant advantages shown in the chart are greatly overwhelmed when you look at the radically different populations the three types of schools deal with. Originally Posted by TexTushHog

What about private schools that have special scholarships for poor minorities, handicapped, etc?
Some private schools cater to the troubled...
From http://www.privateschoolreview.com/articles/61

Schools for Troubled Teens
Schools for troubled teens are often styled 'therapeutic' schools. Their students have been unable to succeed academically in regular schools. Perhaps discipline is a problem. Or the child has an eating disorder or is suicidal. The program at a therapeutic school tends to be highly structured so that a child learns how to cope. Some therapeutic schools deal with substance abuse issues. Children who are addicted to drugs and alcohol can find the professional help and counseling they need to change their lives. Other schools specialize in emotional growth issues.
Admission to these schools is on an 'as needed' basis. You won't have to wait until a certain date to admit your child. Some schools have minimum stays in order to ensure the effectiveness of their programs.


Schools for At Risk Teens
Several cities offer 'street schools' modeled after the highly successful Denver Street School. The Cristo del Rey model sponsored by the Jesuits offers another option for 'at risk' teens.


Schools for Special Needs
Special needs schools cover a wide range of learning issues. Everything from dyslexia to ADHD is dealt with by highly trained professionals. Schools such as The Forman School in Litchfield, Connecticut, are famous for their great results.

Be warned: alternative schools are not inexpensive. The one on one teaching which most of these schools use escalates the cost of educating a child. Is it worth it? Ask the satisfied graduates and their parents.

Non-color. Angry non-colored. Middle class people of non-color. It's a CONSERVATIVE right.

Well you covered a lot of bases there in just a few words.
Oh, and your premise is bullshit. Are there a lot of middle-class white kids evacuating public schools and vouchering into private catholic schools? Or a lot of black kids for that matter.

The whole voucher argument is bullshit and you know it.
Here we go again with what you know that "we know".

It's a device to enable angry people of non-color to get their kids away from the public school population and let taxpayers pay for them to do so.
You say that like it's a bad thing.

It's a handout. an entitlement for sure. But when it's to help middle class people of non-color to put their kids in private (church) schools, it's a CONSERVATIVE right.
Is it really a handout if the middle class people of non-color are the ones who are paying the schools taxes to begin with? Aren't they just getting a piece of their own money back?
SNCK! Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

So, are you saying that you believe that ONLY white people will be allowed to get vouchers? I'm pretty sure that is illegal.

I believe it IS a bad thing as recommended. Public school systems will be left to rot while trying to service the majority of American student with reduced income. Vouchers will NOT pay for private tuition. So if you give therm to low income families it really won't matter, while the districts to which they send their kids will either wither and die or become straight welfare.

either way, it's bullshit, and I BELIEVE IT!

I also believe that we will be doing the next generation damage (not to mention our country) by allowing the "belief" system of private institutions dictate what our kids are taught and exposed to.

Resegregating our schools is tantamount to child abuse.

I believe that.

Your last question is asinine. I'll try and remember that I thought you were smarter than that beforehand.