|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Users Browsing Forum
No Members and 3 Guests
|
 Pages: 1 |
 Author |
 NY Times: How the Rich homeschool (currently 1,062 views) |
| Admin |
| Posted on: June 7th, 2006, 2:44pm |
  |
|
Posts: 1,794
|
I thought this was kind of an interesting article on how some richer parents are deciding to "homeschool" their kids by hiring a teacher to come to their home. I don't know how long this link will work, because NY Times usually doesn't keep free articles around for very long:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06.....c7&ex=1149825600 |
Elizabeth
Mom to Eric (8 ) and Ruby (4.5) |
|
 Logged |
|
|
|
|
| inginouity |
| Posted on: June 7th, 2006, 3:16pm |
|
|
Guest User
|
Very interesting article, Elizabeth, thanks for sharing this. The reason they give for homeschooling is more or less the one I have too. I am not crazy about the public schooling system, but I have nothing against it either. The year that my son was in pre K was fun for him and he had a great teacher. But it just did not work for us, with all the traveling, to respect the public school calendar.
Also, I love having my son around and have so much quality family time. My husband works late afternoon till early night and it gives us a lot of time together, which we all love. Especially since my son and I spend so much time away from home.
I worry sometimes over whether I will be able to keep up and be able to teach him when we get to higher grades, because, unlike the people in that article, no way could I afford to pay $70 and up for a tutor. Would be great if I could, but unless I win a lottery or something, I don't see that happen :0) But we'll cross that bridge when we get there.
Ginou
|
|
| Logged |
|
|
 |
Reply: 1 - 5 |
|
|
| Admin |
| Posted on: June 7th, 2006, 7:20pm |
|
|
Posts: 1,794
|
One of the things I found interesting, which was pointed out briefly at the end of the article, is that the "definition" of homeschooling (if there ever was one) is loosening up.
It probably used to mean kids stayed home and one or both parents chose a course of study for the child, acted as tutor, and of course PAID for the learning materials. Nowadays, kids might be involved in a distance learning program where the parents pay, but the curriculum is delivered by computer and tutors are available online. Or, kids might be enrolled in a state-sponsored charter "homeschool" where the parents don't pick OR pay for the curriculum. Or, as in this article, the tutor is not a parent and comes into the kid's home.
They say that many more "traditional" homeschoolers don't like the word "homeschool" being used in this context. For example, I've heard that opinion expressed about the "homeschool" portion of Family School's day.
But I feel that the great thing about the "revolution" that made homeschooling legal back in the 80s is that it has opened up so many different ways for kids to learn outside of the traditional public or private school system. |
Elizabeth
Mom to Eric (8 ) and Ruby (4.5) |
|
| Logged |
|
|
| |
Reply: 2 - 5 |
|
|
| Twinville2 |
| Posted on: June 8th, 2006, 3:07am |
|
|
Guest User
|
This is interesting.
I was under the impression that for a family to homeschool,
one or both parents, or legal guardians, must be the only
people teaching their child.
No tuturing permitted, except as, in addition to parental/guardian
teaching.
This is the case with South Carolina(where we just came from),
as well as New Mexico.
And from what I have read on the HSLDA state laws, this is also
the only accepted legal way to homeschool a student.
Have the laws recently loosened up....a lot? |
|
| Logged |
|
|
|
Reply: 3 - 5 |
|
|
| Admin |
| Posted on: June 8th, 2006, 3:26am |
|
|
Posts: 1,794
|
Hi Lisa, the laws haven't loosened up here in NM, so I think what you're saying is correct. But my understanding is that its permissible in NM to have a child tutored at home by an accredited teacher rather than a parent; it's just that the state's homeschooling laws wouldn't cover it; instead, the family would probably need to register as a private school. I guess you could call it "school at home" instead of "home school".
It seems like I read somewhere that in a lot of states the laws surrounding homeschooling basically define the home school as a special kind of private school. The idea was that since the states already had laws on the books defining regulations for private schools, they just adapted them for home schools instead of writing entirely new legislation. |
Elizabeth
Mom to Eric (8 ) and Ruby (4.5) |
|
| Logged |
|
|
| |
Reply: 4 - 5 |
|
|
| Natalie_Barela |
| Posted on: June 28th, 2006, 2:22am |
|
|
Guest User
|
| Here in Ca, you have to register with the state to homeschool as a private school, but using a teacher to supplument, guide, or tutor a child is allowed. They have two types of forms--one for a school of less than 6 children--usually a family--and the other for 7 kids and above. Its for trruancy laws only--there are no other rules. Many times, when the parents want to continue homeschooling, and have trouble in one or another area, with an older or advanced student, they might hire out a teacher to help. Its done privately-- nothing to do with the schools. (From what I know, they usually know someone.) Of course, that is CA but I most people that I know that do this only use teachers some of the time. Maybe the rich do have the ability to do that full-time. ????? As you know, the needs of a homeschooler change. |
|
| Logged |
|
|
|
Reply: 5 - 5 |
|
Pages: 1 |
| |
| Forum Rules |
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post polls
You may not post attachments
|
HTML is off
Blah Code is on
Smilies are on
|
|
|
|
Powered by e-blah Platinum 8.3 © 2001-2005 - May 25th, 2013, 12:18pm
|
|
|
Locked Board
