“I Could Never Homeschool.”

17 06 2007


“I could never homeschool.”

“My son doesn’t learn that way — he needs structure.”

“My daughter is not motivated.”

“How do you do it? We never could.”

These are not comments from uninvolved or uncaring or unthinking parents. These are comments I hear all the time from wonderful parents who are absolutely right.


Absolutely right.

Read the rest of this entry »

So We Were Saying Censorship Is a Bad Thing. . .

17 06 2007

as champion of public education Greg Laden and his anonymous, pissy blog-puppets continue grumbling that homeschoolers generally — JJ especially — are censor-happy control freaks, you know, that old Reichian argument abut how we shut out the real world and make zombie slaves of young minds? Even as they claim WE are bashing THEM. . . 😀

I fetched this from the NHEN “In the Public” legislative forums, to remind us and them that public schooling is in fact the Big Red Pen of Censorship and indoctrination posing as education — not happy, free, progressive family-based learning from real books and real life in all its messy complexity and diversity.

Bowdlerized school texts and canned corporate curriculum honor neither reason nor faith, diversity nor standards, neither liberal nor conservative education and human values — indeed no coherent value at all.

Why are we championing this clumsy indoctrination as education, again? Anybody? Bueller?

LANGUAGE POLICE: Cut on the Bias
BY Diane Ravitch
Ms. Ravitch is author of “The Language Police: How Pressure Groups Restrict What Students Learn” (Knopf, 2003).

. . .I compiled a list of over 500 words that are banned by one or more publishers. Some are relatively obsolete, like “authoress” or “geezer,” but others are everyday words that one is likely to encounter in the newspaper, like “landlord,” “senior citizen,” “dogma,” “yacht” or “actress” (what would the late Katherine Hepburn have made of that?).

Read the rest of this entry »

Blurring Family Value Lines Would Benefit Us All

17 06 2007

From James Traub in the NYT Magazine today [the sound you hear is JJ cheering and high-fiving] :

. . .I don’t think it’s too much to hope that a different kind of first family could also blur the sharp line of red-blue antagonism.

The endless fight over “values” always seems to pit two idealized states against each other — the prelapsarian world of “the intact family” against the liberatory culture of “the ’60s.” Who actually lives in one of these worlds — besides the current tenants of the White House? Wouldn’t it be to our benefit to scramble those boundaries?

If someone’s going to argue for prayer in the schools, let it be a twice-divorced Catholic president — or, for that matter, an urbane and worldly black first couple.