Homeschooling

[WMostellar]

I want to preface what I'm going to say with a disclaimer, this is not directed at anyone who was homeschooled or parents homeschooling their children: When I taught the biggest thing I noticed about homeschooled students was their difficulty adjusting socially and fitting in. Sure, you can teach you child how to act appropriately and get the day's lessons covered in 2-3 hours, but there's so much that's missing. P.E., recess, lunch, music, art, etc.. just aren't the same without your classmates. That's not a scientific study, those are just my observations.

My observation is that most of the homeschooled AND government educated children who have trouble adjusting socially regardless of where they are educated.

It's much more about parents and environment than teachers. My was was a school teacher, is a parent, and I've worked with youth for the past 25 years.

My kids get more PE (club level soccer), recess (playing on and off during the day), music (my oldest will be a piano major next year), art (#2 takes private lessons every week - his teach says he could wasily do it professionally), lunch (did I mention that part of their curricula is to learn to cook), social interaction (the two oldest have or are Senior Patrol Leaders in Boy Scouts and will be Eagle Scouts shortly, #3 is the Team Captain of his soccer team). I could go on and on...

I haven't done anything special with my kids - they would be as socially adjusted if they had attended a government school. All we've done is supply them with the tools they need to succeed, and they are.

 

[SoonerATC]

Am getting closer and closer to homeschooling. I will paste an email that I had to send to Maggie's school today which will explain why - I am livid.

HERE! HERE! That is a perfect example of why we won't be sending our kids to the government schools. And your example was even dealing with a private school, which is generally supposed to have more latitude with their policies.

I read my wife (an elementary teacher) your email and she said your daughter's example is not unique. She's seen it plenty of times before.

Regarding the "social issues" portion of your email - Anyone else want to argue with my point that the government schools have an agenda not based on actual education?

 

[EDUC8-or]

Am getting closer and closer to homeschooling. I will paste an email that I had to send to Maggie's school today which will explain why - I am livid.

Greetings-

My name is Jim and I am Maggie's father.

Maggie came home today with some news that distressed her and frankly it distressed me as well. Previously a series of books Maggie read and tested on for AR were disallowed. On top of losing the points, Maggie did not understand why, if the books were available for an AR test, she wasn't allowed to test on them. I disagreed with the position taken as well, but we let it go. This weekend, we decided to get Maggie some books that would not only fit the AR testing, but also be books that she would enjoy reading and would engage her. We looked on the AR website and checked books that we thought she would like as well as test over. The books that we bought were:

1) Tom Sawyer - Mark Twain
2) The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn - Mark Twain
3) A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court - Mark Twain
4) Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde - Robert Louis Stevenson
5) Gone with the Wind - Margaret Mitchell

She was thrilled with the books and started on Gone with the Wind into which she made a substantial dent in last night and fell in love with the story as millions have since its publishing in the 1930's. Today, she came home and gave the news that none of these books were allowed for her under the AR program. She said that she was told to "wait" on a couple of them, and that Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn had "social issues". This was bad news to us, and I told Maggie that she was to keep reading Gone with the Wind, as well as the other books that we purchased regardless of the decision made at school.

First, let's discuss the "wait" comment, and the basic age appropriateness of Maggie's reading materials. Maggie has always been a voracious and skilled reader. She was reading things at the fifth grade level in first and second grade. Her latest Iowa Basic Skills Test show her in the 99th percentile in Reading with a Grade Equivalent of 12. Her Language total is also the 99th percentile and a Grade Equivalent of 13+. Her reading gifts have always created problems in that it is hard to feed her voracious appetite for books. We walk a fine line because things that are "grade appropriate" for her bore her to tears because they do not challenge or excite her. This is not a new problem for Maggie, but what is new is school administration limiting what she can read for credit. This seems unacceptable to both Maggie as well as to me. I do not want to diminish Maggie's enthusiasm for reading by making her read things that are on an equivalent level of what she was reading three years ago. Age appropriate and Maggie are not compatible terms because in academic areas she is not her biological age.

Second, and more troubling to me personally, is the decision regarding Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn. I understand that there are some "social issues" in these books - namely the use of the work "######" as well as a character called "###### Jim". In the books, Tom and Huck are actually friends with Jim - remarkable character development given the racial climate at the times the books were written. Many view Jim's inclusion in Huck Finn to be an attack on the racial themes in society at the time it was published (1884). Humanizing Jim, as well as Huck's struggle between accepted norms in society (racism, lynching's, second class status) and his own feelings of Jim as a friend are important in understanding the overall picture of race in my opinion. Reading those books, as well as Gone with the Wind, will give her a greater appreciation for the history of the time and also helps her understand where we have been as a country to give her a proper perspective on where we are today, particularly with President Obama. Further, with the coarseness of our times - from music, television and movies - to be able to discuss these issues as raised by Huck Finn is a welcome change rather than having to discuss the same issues as they would be raised by other, less intelligent sources.Additionally, as a bottom line, Nancy and I should be the final arbiters of what Maggie is exposed to and what she is not.

All of these books are on the AR site, and all of them have been deemed appropriate by someone for testing. If all of the books on the AR site are NOT available for Maggie to test on, then a list should be made basically banning those books from Bethany's use of the site. I see little value in banning classic American literature, but it is your school.

We are also somewhat unclear on how the AR "points" system works (we have never had to worry about it). My understanding is that Maggie needs 20pts per quarter to meet objectives. She said that she thought that she needed 20 pts every mid-quarter. So, it would seem she needs somewhere between 80-160 pts for a year - we are unsure which. She did say she has around 190 pts now, so my advice to her was to be done with AR points for the year, since she had accomplished more than the annual goal already, and simply read what she wants. She said that may not be acceptable.

In summary, I would like some resolution on books that Bethany feels are "unacceptable". We will take this information and see if it fits our goals and needs for Maggie. We feel that to limit her reading based on her biological age as opposed to what she can enjoy and comprehend is not acceptable. Also, we feel that as parents we are the sole deciders of what is or is not appropriate reading material regarding social ideas as expressed in literature. Finally, we do not send Maggie to a private school so that she can be denied AR points for what amounts to stifling political correctness. Denying AR points for a great work of American literature just because groups of people (that have probably never read the book) have been offended by it in the past is not a reasonable or wise decision.

I welcome any communication from you on this matter and very much look forward to it.

Thank you all for teaching my daughter, and for making this a good year for her.

Warmest personal regards,

Jim

You might have better luck going directly to the school board. Just remember your daughter's teachers and school are enforcing the decisions of the school board. A teacher I used to work with read a book to their class that was on the banned list and was nearly fired.

None of the books you mentioned seem inappropriate to me, and it's sad to see they're on the banned list.

 

[EDUC8-or]

That is the biggest fallacy there is regarding homeschooled children and also the first one that pro-government school pundits like to use. Regarding their ability to adjust socially, homeschooled children are more likely to be socially-adjusted because they are not around the mal-behaved delinquents that populate every government school classroom. Second, they will get a more balanced social education by being around not only other children their own age, but also adults and children of other ages as they do things with their parents most children don't get to do (grocery shopping, visiting doctor's offices, going out for lunch, etc).

Again, these were just my observations from the children I had in my classroom who had been homeschooled. I can count them all on two hands, but every single one of them had problems adjusting socially and struggled academically. Same goes for my wife who taught for 11 years.

You can't do P.E. at home? Or take your child to the park for recess? Or eat lunch? You can't teach your child music through private piano or violin lessons? (where they would actually learn to READ music, and not just play the triangle or smash cymbals). You can't take your child to an art museum or enroll them in an art class at the local community center? (most government curriculum art classes consist of essentially the color wheel and free drawing anyway).

Go back and read my post carefully, I never said those subjects can't be taught at home. Also, I'm curious to know, what's the agenda of government schools?

I'm not bashing anyone's decisions to homeschool and talking about any of your children. Again, these were just personal experiences. Trust me, there's lots wrong with our public school systems. There are bad teachers and too many politics involved. I'll even say there are school board members who have twisted agendas. When it's time for my daughter to go to school she's going where my wife teaches and we're going to carefully select her teachers. If her needs require I would even consider homeschooling.

 

[jtrain609]

You can't teach your child music through private piano or violin lessons? (where they would actually learn to READ music, and not just play the triangle or smash cymbals).

I learned to read music just fine in a public school, and a horrible public school at that. I figure if my high school in BFE Michigan can teach me how to play french horn, mellophone, drumset, snare drum, tenors and a handful of other percussion instruments, get me to the point of nailing state solo and ensemble, and get me to the point of being able to audition for, and make it into many college level groups, well, I figure just about any public school program can. Oh and that's just prior to college, and I'd done more with music by the time I was 22 than you've probably done in your entire life, and it all started with playing french horn in a public school.

And FYI, there's actually some technique to "smashing cymbals," and there are a good number of people that do it professionally and have done much better in life than you have.

 

[KLB]

I have to agree with Jtrain on that one. Too add, private lessons are expensive. I may not have had the best education, but it's gotten me to where I want to be in life. I really can't complain about that. There are a lot of variables that make up a good public school with most of them being based on the socioeconomic status of the community.

It's a shame that Mark Twain books are not on the reading list. It seems that they are trying to shield the kids from seeing how life really was back then. You want a book that shows how racism and bigotry were a normal part of society back then? Huck Finns your book! My first encounter with that book had to be in middle school. I went to an all black middle school and high school though. They really focused a lot of attention on that part of history. I'm really glad that they put some emphasis on that part of history. It made me really grateful for having the ability to pursue and achieve whatever I'd like to.

With that being said, I'd continue to press them to let her read whatever she likes and get credit for it. If they refuse, I'd still let her read whatever she likes anyways. They can't censor her at home.

I'd probably keep her in a school type enviroment for social issues. She may as well get used to dealing with idiots. I think that many of us deal with idiots on a daily basis as adults. I'd keep her challenged by putting her in the gifted child's programs and sending her to all of the college acedemic camps that I could find for her to attend during the summer. I'd wish that I'd attendend more of these programs when I was younger. You could also push the school to let her skip a few grade levels if there are ways of testing to do so. And then there's also advanced courses that could be taken at the community college.

My former roomate (and JC lurker) was incredibly gifted in school. I believe he graduated high school at 16 and graduated college by 18 or 19. He was all set to go to medical school and was touring campuses. One day he was on campus tour when heard something from above and looked up to see it was a Cessna flying above. At that point he decided that he'd rather be flying airplanes for a living. It didn't hurt that his younger brother (an active JC poster) was also pursuing the same dream. He then took a year or so sabbatical where he back packed Europe and became a ski bum in various places in the US before starting flight school. Why did I tell this story? To show that even smart people can make really dumb decisions.

 

[jtrain609]

Seriously, I'm not even sure why we hang out with that dude.

 

[kellwolf]

We're seriously leaning towards homeschooling with our son as well. The Tom Sawyer/Huck Finn issue alone is a prime example with something that's wrong in the school system today. Rather than use the topic as a launching point for how public sentiment changes with the times and how opinions evolve, it's been decided to just toss the books out b/c of "social issues." Fact is, any educated person is going to look at the books as a product of their times rather than some inflammatory novel written to get attention. Same can't be said of a lot of music today, actually.

My wife's been researching something called "unshchooling" where you pretty much let the child dictate the pace and subject matter. The parents' job is to turn pretty much everything they can into a learning experience. My son, even at the age of 4, rebels against any kind of structure. Might be normal, might not. He hasn't really reached an age where I can tell if a structured or unstructured curriculum would benefit him more. But, he's a LOT more open to listening and interacting if it's something he's interested in right then. Maggie seems like a very driven child, so this might be an option for you.

On the social issue....I don't buy into it. Yeah, homeschool kids might appear to be more social inept than their HS conterparts. But there's really no proof that if they were educated in the HS system that they would be more social apt. My HS expereince, bluntly, sucked. I was never homeschooled, and attended school from the age of 5. I was pretty much a social outcast the entire time, so homeschooling didn't do it to me, the alienation of being "different" or "smarter" at school did it. I'm guessing that's what Maggie's going through as well. In my experience, it was "uncool" to get good grades, so if you consistently scored higher than most, well, you got made fun of so THEY could feel better about themselves. I had my select group of friends that I hung out with in high school, and, ironically, the thing that brough us all together was the thing that set us apart from everyone else: intellect. The kids I hung out with in high school were the OTHER kids that got picked on for reading books instead of playing football.

 

[mjg407]

Don't expect a lot of sympathy from the schools on the reading issue....

When I was in 1st grade I was reading at a 6th grade level. I was light-years ahead of my classmates in reading. I remember being taken into a big room with old reading texts that the school was just giving out to the students.... I actually had the workbook to one of the texts from the 4th grade level, and wanted the textbook to go along with it, but being in 1st grade I wasn't allowed to have it.

Reading "class" bored the ever living #### out of me. I would finish the class reading assignment in a matter of minutes, and would sit bored off my ass for the rest of the class time. I was not allowed into any advanced reading classes.

Let her read whatever she wants. I read Gone With the Wind in 6th grade and loved it.

Here's a twist on this little thread. My daughter is in the GATE program here. The district however is having problems, they have a school that has underperformed for the past 4 years, grossly underperformed. The districts solution, move the GATE kids, to the under performing school! Don't fix the education problem, just move the gifted kids to your school that underperforms to 1) Get it off the State bad boy list for underperformance, because you just changed the curriculum and 2) bring up the schools grades by bringing in the "ringers". Which doesn't help the kids who were "" underperforming "" at all. I've wasted many a man hour and brain cell over the past month presenting arguements to the board on how their logic is flawed to no avail (myself and about 150 other parents). Bottom line is that we are now looking at a charter school, because who knows if the program is sucessful because of the current environment or the the program itself.

 

[WacoFan]

Here's a twist on this little thread. My daughter is in the GATE program here. The district however is having problems, they have a school that has underperformed for the past 4 years, grossly underperformed. The districts solution, move the GATE kids, to the under performing school! Don't fix the education problem, just move the gifted kids to your school that underperforms to 1) Get it off the State bad boy list for underperformance, because you just changed the curriculum and 2) bring up the schools grades by bringing in the "ringers". Which doesn't help the kids who were "" underperforming "" at all. I've wasted many a man hour and brain cell over the past month presenting arguements to the board on how their logic is flawed to no avail (myself and about 150 other parents). Bottom line is that we are now looking at a charter school, because who knows if the program is sucessful because of the current environment or the the program itself.

Wow. Just wow.

 

[Roger, Roger]

That's alright. All the teachers will stop coming in to work anyway when the state starts paying them in IOUs.

 

[SoonerATC]

I'd done more with music by the time I was 22 than you've probably done in your entire life, and it all started with playing french horn in a public school.

Kudos. So?

And FYI, there's actually some technique to "smashing cymbals," and there are a good number of people that do it professionally and have done much better in life than you have.

Thanks for that bit of analysis, given you don't know me at all.

Too add, private lessons are expensive. I may not have had the best education, but it's gotten me to where I want to be in life. I really can't complain about that.

I agree they're expensive, but can you put a price tag on your child's education? Your child might not even be interested in music, in which case private lessons would not even be worthwhile. I was simply listing it as a higher quality alternative. I, myself, am a product of government schools. I graduated just under 10 years ago (wow...), and even in that amount of time I can see just how much the school systems have changed for the worse.

I'd keep her challenged by putting her in the gifted child's programs and sending her to all of the college acedemic camps that I could find for her to attend during the summer.

College camps are a great idea, but the gifted programs I took part in basically just dumped extra homework on me, rather than allowed me to actually develop myself beyond the capacity of the regular classroom.

You could also push the school to let her skip a few grade levels if there are ways of testing to do so. And then there's also advanced courses that could be taken at the community college.

True, but then aren't you negating the argument about the social benefits of being in a government school? She'd be in classes with kids older than her, which at that age would mean quite a bit in terms of emotional development.

Here's a twist on this little thread. My daughter is in the GATE program here. The district however is having problems, they have a school that has underperformed for the past 4 years, grossly underperformed. The districts solution, move the GATE kids, to the under performing school! Don't fix the education problem, just move the gifted kids to your school that underperforms to 1) Get it off the State bad boy list for underperformance, because you just changed the curriculum and 2) bring up the schools grades by bringing in the "ringers". Which doesn't help the kids who were "" underperforming "" at all. I've wasted many a man hour and brain cell over the past month presenting arguements to the board on how their logic is flawed to no avail (myself and about 150 other parents). Bottom line is that we are now looking at a charter school, because who knows if the program is sucessful because of the current environment or the the program itself.

Go back and read my post carefully, I never said those subjects can't be taught at home. Also, I'm curious to know, what's the agenda of government schools?

I saw it the first time. I just don't believe having other students around(particularly when they're disruptive) contributes to learning art, music, or eating lunch (particularly given that at my school, teachers demanded that students had to keep the noise essentially to below a low whisper while eating in the cafeteria.)

The agenda of the government schools is to indoctrinate the future populace to be ignorant, politically-correct communists who do not have the capability (real or perceived) to challenge the governing elite pulling the strings of power. They're doing it in a number of ways, namely through the elimination of any type of religious expression, the imposition of radical left-wing ideologies, and the failure to teach the primary principles upon which the country was actually founded, particularly a devotion to liberty, patriotism, and personal responsibility. Look at "No Child Left Behind". We're going to make sure every child succeeds, even at the expense of those who excel. Perfect example is mjg407's post directly above this. It's really just an extension of what you're seeing in society overall. Instead of telling the underachievers to kick it up a notch and give them an incentive to succeed, we're just going to bring down the most successful so that the gap isn't so large.

If you haven't ever read the story "Harrison Bergeron", I would highly recommend it.

Do you think it's any coincidence that Obama's girls aren't attending D.C. public schools? Or that Chelsea Clinton didn't attend public school either? Hell no. Those in power are going to make sure their kids are more intelligent than the ignorant, government educated masses.
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/11/obama_children.html

Chew on this. Government is the MOST inefficient way to possibly accomplish anything. It's incredibly wasteful both fiscally and in terms of actual productivity. In some respect, the Founding Fathers designed it this way to ensure that massive changes could not be implemented overnight and some form of stability remained constant. However, this is also characteristic of government in general throughout the world. Now, what makes anyone think that the most inefficient, wasteful entity imagineable could actually do well at educating your sons and daughters? Sure they might squeak out a few Einstein's here and there, but that's far more likely a result of the natural gift of the individual rather than evidence of the merits of the government education system.

I'm not bashing anyone's decisions to homeschool and talking about any of your children. Again, these were just personal experiences. Trust me, there's lots wrong with our public school systems. There are bad teachers and too many politics involved. I'll even say there are school board members who have twisted agendas. When it's time for my daughter to go to school she's going where my wife teaches and we're going to carefully select her teachers. If her needs require I would even consider homeschooling.

I didn't interpret your comments as bashing. And good luck selecting her teachers. If you're even allowed to do that, you're being given a privelege 99% of parents do not get.

 

[Roger, Roger]

Again, these were just my observations from the children I had in my classroom who had been homeschooled. I can count them all on two hands, but every single one of them had problems adjusting socially and struggled academically.

Ask around. You will find that the bolded section is an enormous exception to the rule. As an example, there were four people in my major in my college graduating class who graduated Summa Cum Laude. 3 of us were homeschooled in high school.

 

[mjg407]

Wow. Just wow.

It's the averagification of america. That and the school district not wanting to lose management positions.

 

[KLB]

True, but then aren't you negating the argument about the social benefits of being in a government school? She'd be in classes with kids older than her, which at that age would mean quite a bit in terms of emotional development.

Well Wacofan said that his daughter does well around older pupils. I did well around older pupils. Most of my friends in school were older than me.

The agenda of the government schools is to indoctrinate the future populace to be ignorant, politically-correct communists who do not have the capability (real or perceived) to challenge the governing elite pulling the strings of power. They're doing it in a number of ways, namely through the elimination of any type of religious expression, the imposition of radical left-wing ideologies, and the failure to teach the primary principles upon which the country was actually founded, particularly a devotion to liberty, patriotism, and personal responsibility. Look at "No Child Left Behind". We're going to make sure every child succeeds, even at the expense of those who excel. Perfect example is mjg407's post directly above this. It's really just an extension of what you're seeing in society overall.

Wow! You've linked the public school system to communism. Thats a new one. I thought the agenda of government schools was to make education accesible the every child. I could be wrong though. I don't mind religious expression in school if everyone was allowed to express their religion. It's usually only the expression of Christianity. That's not fair to people who practice religions other than that. I believe that the "no child left behind" deal needs a serious makeover. Its ineffective. I believe the public school system has been and still is neccesary for the wealth and prosperity of this nation. There's no doubt about that.

Do you think it's any coincidence that Obama's girls aren't attending D.C. public schools? Or that Chelsea Clinton didn't attend public school either? Hell no. Those in power are going to make sure their kids are more intelligent than the ignorant, government educated masses.
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/11/obama_children.html

You don't think that having the children of the President of the United States going to school a public school is a security risk and media nightmare. It's only been days after the election and these kids already have dolls that resemble them. I would have loved to see them go to a public school, but the reality is that it's best that they go to a private school.

 

[KLB]

Here's a twist on this little thread. My daughter is in the GATE program here. The district however is having problems, they have a school that has underperformed for the past 4 years, grossly underperformed. The districts solution, move the GATE kids, to the under performing school! Don't fix the education problem, just move the gifted kids to your school that underperforms to 1) Get it off the State bad boy list for underperformance, because you just changed the curriculum and 2) bring up the schools grades by bringing in the "ringers". Which doesn't help the kids who were "" underperforming "" at all. I've wasted many a man hour and brain cell over the past month presenting arguements to the board on how their logic is flawed to no avail (myself and about 150 other parents). Bottom line is that we are now looking at a charter school, because who knows if the program is sucessful because of the current environment or the the program itself.

I believe that are being sly. They are secretly trying to cut cost. They need less resources when they put all the kids together. They are using the underperformance deal as an excuse in my opinion. It's bullcrap!

 

[mjg407]

I believe that are being sly. They are secretly trying to cut cost. They need less resources when they put all the kids together. They are using the underperformance deal as an excuse in my opinion. It's bullcrap!

Negative, they are not admitting to the underperformance being the reason, they are attempting to save the school. A school that underperforms so many years in a row, is subject to state take over, unless that school performs, or changes it's curriculum.

 

[WacoFan]

University of Phoenix gets bashed on JC a little bit, but they obviously offer something that someone finds valuable - both students and employers. This issue with the school has got me thinking that what would really be excellent is some kind of elementary and middle school - and perhaps high school, that is an online learning type of deal like U of Phoenix. You could have accreditation, a curriculum for high achieving kids, networking opportunities with other online kids in your city, etc. You could even pay one or two teachers if a city had enough enrollment to be available in an office so kids could go get help. It could be a school just for the gifted.

 

[SoonerATC]

Wow! You've linked the public school system to communism. Thats a new one. I thought the agenda of government schools was to make education accesible the every child. I could be wrong though. I don't mind religious expression in school if everyone was allowed to express their religion. It's usually only the expression of Christianity. That's not fair to people who practice religions other than that. I believe that the "no child left behind" deal needs a serious makeover. Its ineffective. I believe the public school system has been and still is neccesary for the wealth and prosperity of this nation. There's no doubt about that.

1. Making education available to every child (via growing policies to mandate government school attendance vs home schooling) is a means, not the end. 2. Schools do not officially promote Christianity, but they do prohibit the expression thereof...a clear violation of the 3rd Amendment. Christianity (Catholicism in particular) is the only true religion anyway, so I frankly have no sympathy for other religions crying "it's not fair." They're practicing a false religion anyway. That's another thread for another day though

One of the biggest fallacies existing in society is that communism died with the Soviet Union. It didn't die...it just took a more subtle approach. The objectives are still the same. I quote these selections from The Principles of Communism:

What will this new [communist] social order have to be like?

"...it will have to take the control of industry and of all branches of production...and instead institute a system in which all these branches of production are operated by society as a whole..." Sound familiar?

"Private property must, therefore, be abolished..."

What will be the course of this revolution?

"Democracy would be wholly valueless to the proletariat if it were not immediately used as a means for putting through measures directed against private property and ensuring the livelihood of the proletariat..."

"The main measures...are the following:
(i) Limitation of private property through progressive taxation, heavy inheritance taxes, abolition of inheritance through collateral lines (brothers, nephews, etc.) forced loans, etc..." Once again, sound familiar?

(vi) Centralization of money and credit in the hands of the state through a national bank with state capital, and the suppression of all private banks and bankers. How about this one?

And the grand-daddy of them all...the coup d'grace of my ENTIRE post.....

(viii) Education of all children, from the moment they can leave their mother’s care, in national establishments at national cost. Education and production together.


What will be its attitude to existing religions?
"All religions so far have been the expression of historical stages of development of individual peoples or groups of peoples. But communism is the stage of historical development which makes all existing religions superfluous and brings about their disappearance. You don't have to look hard to see that religion is fast becoming extinct as a facet of society. Religion is being attacked in schools, public parks, on the sides of public transit systems, through the media, and even from being expressed on private property.

Communism is not dead.

You don't think that having the children of the President of the United States going to school a public school is a security risk and media nightmare. It's only been days after the election and these kids already have dolls that resemble them. I would have loved to see them go to a public school, but the reality is that it's best that they go to a private school.

I figured you would say that, but he didn't send his kids to public school in Chicago either.

 

[KLB]

Negative, they are not admitting to the underperformance being the reason, they are attempting to save the school. A school that underperforms so many years in a row, is subject to state take over, unless that school performs, or changes it's curriculum.

Well if they are going to do that, they should atleast set up accelerated classes for your daughter the other GATE kids. It's just not very fair at all. I'd fight that one to the bitter end. I was placed in an accelerated class when I was in elementary school. Leaving those types of classes behind was the absolute worst part of moving the Mississippi. There is a big difference( the amount of attention you got from the teachers due to the smaller class sizes and dicipline of my pupils were the big ones) between those accelerated classes and being mixed in with all the rest of the kids.