BarkingUnicorn: rugman11: Yeah, there's no reason a wealthy family couldn't put 12 years worth of education into 6 or 7 years. Especially when you've got only four or five students at a time. The problem is that public schools have to target the median and run a class that doesn't leave anybody behind. Unfortunately, that makes it difficult to let anybody get ahead either.And it's not always a good idea. These kids seem to be doing fine, but they also have a natural, built-in support structure that a lot of students don't have. It worked for them, but I'd hesitate to push it as a recommended course.If public schools teach at the median's pace, won't they leave 50% of kids behind? I think the target is set just above "potato" these days. (Thanks, GW!)This family does not seem wealthy. The only working parent (in a family of 12!) seems to be dad, retired military and a FEMA functionary. Mom claims to be a physician, but I can't find a word about any practice; I don't believe she could earn any significant money as a doctor will tending 10 kids, let alone home-schooling them. She sells phone consultations; maybe that's doing well. Oh, and she writes for "Mormon Times," which is telling but hardly lucrative, I imagine. In any case, she claims to have schooled the kids herself, not hiring expensive tutors.I don't think "1% wealthy" parents would choose home-schooling. Much of their kids' career preparation depends upon schmoozing with other rich brats and their families. (Note that a "career" does not involve productive work, necessarily.)I really don't know what to make of this extreme outlier family. They're selling the message that home-schooling is easy for any (two-parent) family and can produce extraordinary results. Smells like "get rich quick in real estate" seminars.
profplump: Why would you tolerate a society that requires lockstep age-driven advancement in academics in order to be considered well-adjusted?
Yankees Team Gynecologist: Why would you jeopardize your child's chances at being a well-adjusted and socialized adult by sending them to college at 12
BokerBill: TFA: We find out what the child likes first and then we broaden as we go.I like this approach. First get them engaged learning something, anything. It's just more fun to learn stuff you care about. Once a kid learns that learning can be fun, then you show them how the other subjects can be interesting too.But that kind of learning requires the teacher to know the students very, very well: something on the order of home schooling with its high teacher/student ratio and its extended teacher/student relationship.
Aidan: GBB: Let him play with that for a while until he wants to start building things. Then a lot of math will come into play. But, be sure he's really into the electronics and not the mechanics. My parents thought I was destined for Electrical as well, but I grew more into Mechanical.One thing you should look for is his learning technique. Is it completely procedural (step 1, step 2, step 3....) or is it conceptual (start here, end there, here's the path and why you want to go this way and not that way).I hear you on that one. I strongly suspect he's like you in that respect. Heavy mechanical. And right now his learning technique is to a) make small things like basic circuits b) talk about all the amazing things he's going to make and c) try to get us to make them for him. So clearly I don't have to worry YET. I just really wish there was a step between basic circuits and bomb-detonating robots! :P But I'm gonna try the Dummies series of books for him. We're already reading old Radio Shack books at bedtime (Jesus those are dull).
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Aug 23 2017 13:55:09
Runtime: 0.264 sec (264 ms)