Are some schools failing due to lack of money or environment

[Politically_Incorrect12]

Apr 11, 2013 14:36:50 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Apr 10, 2013 15:55:36 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Finland wasn't always where they are today. They had a push for educational reform in the 1960's, which focused on 3 things  - 1) develop of a national curriculum with students held to rigrous standards, 2) dramatic changes in teacher certifications and 3) controls from their federal government that evaluated the school level learning and teaching.

This 1960's reform is what pushed them from 'average' to 'great.'

Generally when you are trying to find a good model on how to do something, you look at other successful models to see what worked for other people, and evaluate whether or not that might work for you. So yes, while Finland isn't the US, there may be things we can learn from their success, should we be open minded enough to study what they did right, and not just refuse to look at what they did because 'they aren't exactly like we are.' 

The closer you look, the more you realize that Finland’s approach works not because it is a universal template of success but, instead, because it was a Finnish solution to which they committed. Americans shouldn’t be looking to slavishly copy these exact hard choices; rather, we should be looking to the spirit with which they made them and their resolve to see these decisions through.

And please note nowhere in my previous post or in this post did I suggest we 'just throw money' at the educational system, because I agree, throwing money at things never makes them better. Ever.

www.edexcellence.net/commentary/education-gadfly-daily/flypaper/2012/real-lessons-from-finland-hard-choices-rigorously-implemented.html

i am with happy on this.  Finland rocks.  we should clear the slate and start over again, using their principles for our public institutions.  we would eventually catch up. 

but we won't do that.  we will keep (proudly?) embracing our traditional model, and keep falling further behind.

Every country probably has its own unique issues with educating the population, but we shouldn't be so quick to assume what works in one place will work in another with different issues. Is there some good ideas in the Finnish system...maybe. Are there things that should be changed with our current system, most would say yes. However it starts with figuring out what the issues are and going from there.  Statistics rarely tell the whole story.  We have schools that do well and schools that don't do well.  Is it the system, money, or the environment?  So what ultimately are the issues you see?

[djAdvocate]

Apr 11, 2013 14:56:58 GMT -5 Politically_Incorrect12 said:

Apr 11, 2013 14:36:50 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i am with happy on this.  Finland rocks.  we should clear the slate and start over again, using their principles for our public institutions.  we would eventually catch up. 

but we won't do that.  we will keep (proudly?) embracing our traditional model, and keep falling further behind.

Every country probably has its own unique issues with educating the population, but we shouldn't be so quick to assume what works in one place will work in another with different issues. Is there some good ideas in the Finnish system...maybe. Are there things that should be changed with our current system, most would say yes. However it starts with figuring out what the issues are and going from there.  Statistics rarely tell the whole story.  We have schools that do well and schools that don't do well.  Is it the system, money, or the environment?  So what ultimately are the issues you see?

i think the issues have to do with reward and creativity.  i think they have to do with the type of society we have, and the type of society we want.  and i think they have to do with attitudes toward submission to authority.  the Finnish system has it basically 100% right on all three counts.  they want highly creative, autonomous individuals that can learn, study, and innovate without the need for supervision.  what do we want?

[SweetVirginia]

As someone who has been teaching for 13 years in a Los Angeles suburb district, I can say with out a doubt that schools are NOT failing due to money. (my opinion of course)  The amount of money that is thrown at urban and suburban schools, especially schools with large populations of poor and English learning students, is astronomical.  The problem is not lack of money. The problem is comprehensive. First, the amount of money that is mismanaged and frankly, "stolen" is unbelievable.  I see corruption on an everyday basis and it disheartens me greatly.  There is so much fraud waste and abuse, it is sad and infuriating.  Second, I believe that we must provide services to our students such as classroom instruction, nutrition to students in need, school supplies, technology, special education for students who are in real need ,etc, but I   know for a fact that these services are being abused(by parents)  and wrongly dispersed (by administrators.) I also believe that there are too many teachers that are being allowed to remain in the classroom who should have been let go a long time ago. Some teachers are simply collecting paychecks, and not providing a quality education to our students.  Finally, I firmly believe that parents play a HUGE role in the success or failure of their children in school.  This is a major factor that is not given enough consideration when schools are being judged and scrutinized.  All of this said, I believe that funding is critical to the success of our public schools; however, unlimited amounts of money will not make our schools better. Proper use of funding, quality teaching, and positive parent involvement are the keys to educational success.

[happyhoix]

Virginia I liked your post.

I also believe that there are too many teachers that are being allowed to remain in the classroom who should have been let go a long time ago. Some teachers are simply collecting paychecks, and not providing a quality education to our students.

I agree with this part especially - I remember from my own time as a student, and from the experiences of my son and from some friends who are teachers, that it is extremely hard to remove an under performing teacher from the classroom. When DS was in school I had some 'inside' information from my teacher friends as to which teachers he should avoid and which ones he should seek out, and consequently, he had some excellent experiences, especially with his high school math and science teachers (they are probably the main reason DS is currently an industrial engineer). However, it shouldn't be that way - that you have to plot a course for your kid through the 'good' teachers in the school system - they should all be good, the poor ones should be weeded out, but they aren't.

You wouldn't go to a subpar dentist or hire a lawyer that doesn't give a shit about your case.

Part of this is making it harder to be a teacher, so that only the cream of the crop gets through.

And part of this is making a national committment to improving the system - that's one thing, I think, we can copy from the Finnish success, they analyzed their educational system (it took them five years just to do that), came up with some long term goals and then stuck with their improvement plan. None of this jumping from idea to idea, throwing money here and there and wishing for something good to happen.  

[formerroomate99]

Apr 11, 2013 12:39:10 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Apr 11, 2013 9:49:36 GMT -5 formerroomate99 said:

One thing I don't like about the educational system is that you have an education degree that is a joke--any moron can pass.  And then to shore up not doing their job in the first place, teachers are required to waste tons of time and money on these 'continuing education' classes that are either repeats of what they already know or are teaching stuff they should have learned when they first went to college.  Why not just make an education degree a serious program and then let the teachers have their downtime? 

Actually this is the first thing the Finns did when they started their education reform in the 60's.

They looked at their teacher training programs, standardized the requirements and made the classes harder to to ensure the teachers graduated with a solid knowledge of their area.

Only the top 10% of the class was accepted into the teacher training programs, and it became a status symbol to be a teacher, because it was so hard to get into the program.

Something we might want to think about here.

Before they do that, they're going to have to bring discipline and standards back into the schools.  Teaching has become such an unnecessairly stressful job that if the raise the standards, they're not going to have anybody going into the profession. 

[formerroomate99]

You wouldn't go to a subpar dentist or hire a lawyer that doesn't give a shit about your case.

You would if you depended on a government monopoly.  That's the situation many are in.  Tax everyone to death and then they can't afford  private school.

[formerroomate99]

Even if you get the best teachers on the planet, it won't help if the parents don't care about their kid's education or are just combative.  One of the biggest arguments for private school is the fact that your kid will have classmates with decent parents who can leave if they don't like the school.  Even if most of the teachers wouldn't last a week in the public school, more learning can be done more safely if the kids come from homes where eduation is valued. 

[happyhoix]

Apr 12, 2013 9:55:57 GMT -5 formerroomate99 said:

You wouldn't go to a subpar dentist or hire a lawyer that doesn't give a shit about your case.

You would if you depended on a government monopoly.  That's the situation many are in.  Tax everyone to death and then they can't afford  private school.

Well, we like to say you can make it in this country no matter how poor you are as long as you work hard. 

If we abandon the public schools and everyone who can afford it sends their kids to private schools we'll have to change that statement to "If you work really hard and were smart enough to be born to parents who can afford to send you to private school you'll make it in this country." 

A good public school education is the big chance many poor kids have to change their circumstances, so I think it's crucial we figure out what we need to do to fix our schools.  

Otherwise we'll continue to have new crops of poor, uneducated people unable to find anything other than menial work, continuing to need food stamps and TANF, and we all know how popular that is.  

[formerroomate99]

Apr 12, 2013 10:07:29 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Apr 12, 2013 9:55:57 GMT -5 formerroomate99 said:

You would if you depended on a government monopoly.  That's the situation many are in.  Tax everyone to death and then they can't afford  private school.

Well, we like to say you can make it in this country no matter how poor you are as long as you work hard. 

If we abandon the public schools and everyone who can afford it sends their kids to private schools we'll have to change that statement to "If you work really hard and were smart enough to be born to parents who can afford to send you to private school you'll make it in this country." 

A good public school education is the big chance many poor kids have to change their circumstances, so I think it's crucial we figure out what we need to do to fix our schools.  

Otherwise we'll continue to have new crops of poor, uneducated people unable to find anything other than menial work, continuing to need food stamps and TANF, and we all know how popular that is.  

No, I agree with you that we should have good public schools.  But most school districts have a staggering amount of fraud and waste, along with a long list of idiotic policies that hamper education.  Lack of money isn't the issue.  Misuse of the money and then constantly asking for more until nobody can afford any other options is the issue.  It is a power grab, pure and simple. 

[happyhoix]

But most school districts have a staggering amount of fraud and waste, along with a long list of idiotic policies that hamper education. Lack of money isn't the issue. Misuse of the money and then constantly asking for more until nobody can afford any other options is the issue. It is a power grab, pure and simple.

I think we have fallen into doing the same things the same way, and there are certain powerful groups (like the teacher's unions) that are resistant to changing the status quo, especially when it comes to removing poorly performing teachers from the classrooms.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 12, 2013 9:55:57 GMT -5 formerroomate99 said:

You wouldn't go to a subpar dentist or hire a lawyer that doesn't give a shit about your case.

You would if you depended on a government monopoly.  That's the situation many are in.  Tax everyone to death and then they can't afford  private school.

there is no monopoly, and public schools are not really the issue.  it is the quality of those schools that is the problem.  if you were in Finland, you would not be complaining.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 12, 2013 9:59:37 GMT -5 formerroomate99 said:

Even if you get the best teachers on the planet, it won't help if the parents don't care about their kid's education or are just combative. 

parents get blamed a lot, and they are certainly partially responsible.  but i don't think they have nearly the share of the blame as they are often given credit for.  most parents want their kids well educated.  but if you are working 3 jobs, and living in the projects, it is not going to matter whether you care about your kid's education more than any parent on Earth.  he or she is going to have a tough time of it.

[The Captain]

Apr 12, 2013 10:40:05 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Apr 12, 2013 9:59:37 GMT -5 formerroomate99 said:

Even if you get the best teachers on the planet, it won't help if the parents don't care about their kid's education or are just combative. 

parents get blamed a lot, and they are certainly partially responsible.  but i don't think they have nearly the share of the blame as they are often given credit for.  most parents want their kids well educated.  but if you are working 3 jobs, and living in the projects, it is not going to matter whether you care about your kid's education more than any parent on Earth.  he or she is going to have a tough time of it.

Have you watched the PBS documentary "Dropout Nation"?  The kids with parents actually working were the ones that looked most likely to succeed.  It was the kids that had to:

1.  Support their mother and younger siblings due to dad being deported (no mention of mom having a job)
2.  Take care of younger siblings because both parents were usually drunk or high
3.  Figure out how there were going to attend school and care for two kids because, oops!  I'm pregnant again in my junior year
4.  Leave home and live with a teacher because their home situation was so effed up (and btw who got expelled weeks before graduation for getting into a fight at school).

These are real examples from the show in a school with SIGNIFICANT private resources donated to help these kids succeed.  There were special guidance counselors and specially trained teachers who's objective was to get these kids to graduate.

How do we fix this?

[billisonboard]

Apr 12, 2013 12:47:21 GMT -5 The Captain said:

...

How do we fix this?

We don't. The goal of 100% high school graduation with every student meeting high academic standards is a totally absurdity. To indicate that schools have "failed" because they do not meet this goal is ridiculous.

[happyhoix]

Apr 12, 2013 13:44:17 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Apr 12, 2013 12:47:21 GMT -5 The Captain said:

...

How do we fix this?

We don't. The goal of 100% high school graduation with every student meeting high academic standards is a totally absurdity. To indicate that schools have "failed" because they do not meet this goal is ridiculous.

I lived in a country in Europe for a while were all the kids had to take a test in the sixth grade. A certain percentage of the highest scoring kids were allowed to continue in a college prep type high school experience. The rest of the kids had to pick a vocational education training program.

There was no option to drift through high school with no particular plan and get launched on the world with a generic HS degree. You ended up either trained for something or going to college (which was paid for by the State).

Didn't matter if your dream was to go to college, if you didn't do well enough on this 6th grade test, you didn't go. 

I had mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, they made sure all the non-college kids got into very rigrous voc-ed training programs so that everyone graduated with a useful skill. However, it didn't take into account that some kids are late bloomers and might not work hard in school until they hit high school. It seemed to put a lot of pressure on kids at just the 6th grade level, when they're only half baked.

 

[Deleted]

Apr 11, 2013 23:59:20 GMT -5 SweetVirginia said:

As someone who has been teaching for 13 years in a Los Angeles suburb district, I can say with out a doubt that schools are NOT failing due to money. (my opinion of course)  The amount of money that is thrown at urban and suburban schools, especially schools with large populations of poor and English learning students, is astronomical.  The problem is not lack of money. The problem is comprehensive. First, the amount of money that is mismanaged and frankly, "stolen" is unbelievable.  I see corruption on an everyday basis and it disheartens me greatly.  There is so much fraud waste and abuse, it is sad and infuriating.  Second, I believe that we must provide services to our students such as classroom instruction, nutrition to students in need, school supplies, technology, special education for students who are in real need ,etc, but I   know for a fact that these services are being abused(by parents)  and wrongly dispersed (by administrators.) I also believe that there are too many teachers that are being allowed to remain in the classroom who should have been let go a long time ago. Some teachers are simply collecting paychecks, and not providing a quality education to our students.  Finally, I firmly believe that parents play a HUGE role in the success or failure of their children in school.  This is a major factor that is not given enough consideration when schools are being judged and scrutinized.  All of this said, I believe that funding is critical to the success of our public schools; however, unlimited amounts of money will not make our schools better. Proper use of funding, quality teaching, and positive parent involvement are the keys to educational success.

 SV. I think you cover the all of the basic.

[billisonboard]

Apr 12, 2013 13:59:22 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Apr 12, 2013 13:44:17 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

We don't. The goal of 100% high school graduation with every student meeting high academic standards is a totally absurdity. To indicate that schools have "failed" because they do not meet this goal is ridiculous.

I lived in a country in Europe for a while were all the kids had to take a test in the sixth grade. A certain percentage of the highest scoring kids were allowed to continue in a college prep type high school experience. The rest of the kids had to pick a vocational education training program.

There was no option to drift through high school with no particular plan and get launched on the world with a generic HS degree. You ended up either trained for something or going to college (which was paid for by the State).

Didn't matter if your dream was to go to college, if you didn't do well enough on this 6th grade test, you didn't go. 

I had mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, they made sure all the non-college kids got into very rigrous voc-ed training programs so that everyone graduated with a useful skill. However, it didn't take into account that some kids are late bloomers and might not work hard in school until they hit high school. It seemed to put a lot of pressure on kids at just the 6th grade level, when they're only half baked.

 

An answer for the late bloomers would be that at any point they would be able to test into a college prep program. (They would have had to do some serious extra work to pass the test which would show dedication and make them likely to be sucessful.)

[formerroomate99]

Apr 12, 2013 13:59:22 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Apr 12, 2013 13:44:17 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

We don't. The goal of 100% high school graduation with every student meeting high academic standards is a totally absurdity. To indicate that schools have "failed" because they do not meet this goal is ridiculous.

I lived in a country in Europe for a while were all the kids had to take a test in the sixth grade. A certain percentage of the highest scoring kids were allowed to continue in a college prep type high school experience. The rest of the kids had to pick a vocational education training program.

There was no option to drift through high school with no particular plan and get launched on the world with a generic HS degree. You ended up either trained for something or going to college (which was paid for by the State).

Didn't matter if your dream was to go to college, if you didn't do well enough on this 6th grade test, you didn't go. 

I had mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, they made sure all the non-college kids got into very rigrous voc-ed training programs so that everyone graduated with a useful skill. However, it didn't take into account that some kids are late bloomers and might not work hard in school until they hit high school. It seemed to put a lot of pressure on kids at just the 6th grade level, when they're only half baked.

 

Doing the same thing here wouldn't necessairly be the 'carved in stone' results, though.  We have a community college system in this country that teaches remedial classes.  Most 4 year colleges have pretty robust night and online programs.  So if a smart kid who isn't performing due to an effed up family life ends up graduating with a trade that can earn real money, that kid can get the hell out of the situation, work and take a few remedial classes at night, get into college, and then have the means to work his way through college. 

That makes a whole lot more sense that forcing the same kid to sit through a bunch of literature classes, graduate high school and be thrust out into the world with absolutely no marketable skills, and then have to pop out a baby to get health insurance and a decent apartment. 

[djAdvocate]

Apr 12, 2013 12:47:21 GMT -5 The Captain said:

Apr 12, 2013 10:40:05 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

parents get blamed a lot, and they are certainly partially responsible.  but i don't think they have nearly the share of the blame as they are often given credit for.  most parents want their kids well educated.  but if you are working 3 jobs, and living in the projects, it is not going to matter whether you care about your kid's education more than any parent on Earth.  he or she is going to have a tough time of it.

Have you watched the PBS documentary "Dropout Nation"? 

i don't have TV, so no.

The kids with parents actually working were the ones that looked most likely to succeed.  It was the kids that had to:

1.  Support their mother and younger siblings due to dad being deported (no mention of mom having a job)
2.  Take care of younger siblings because both parents were usually drunk or high
3.  Figure out how there were going to attend school and care for two kids because, oops!  I'm pregnant again in my junior year
4.  Leave home and live with a teacher because their home situation was so effed up (and btw who got expelled weeks before graduation for getting into a fight at school).

These are real examples from the show in a school with SIGNIFICANT private resources donated to help these kids succeed.  There were special guidance counselors and specially trained teachers who's objective was to get these kids to graduate.

How do we fix this?

start by scrapping our really outdated and top down system.

[formerroomate99]

Apr 12, 2013 10:40:05 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Apr 12, 2013 9:59:37 GMT -5 formerroomate99 said:

Even if you get the best teachers on the planet, it won't help if the parents don't care about their kid's education or are just combative. 

parents get blamed a lot, and they are certainly partially responsible.  but i don't think they have nearly the share of the blame as they are often given credit for.  most parents want their kids well educated.  but if you are working 3 jobs, and living in the projects, it is not going to matter whether you care about your kid's education more than any parent on Earth.  he or she is going to have a tough time of it.

Yes and no.  You don't just wake up one morning and find yourself a parent to a school aged child.  An awful lot of what makes a good parent are the decisions one makes before the child is conceived, getting your shyt together, putting yourself in a position where you have the time and money to do right by your kid.  Of course there are many cases where someone who did get their acts together falls on hard times.  But there are also an awful lot of people who can't be bothered to think before they breed, and the kids end up paying a high price for it.  

[djAdvocate]

Apr 14, 2013 22:04:19 GMT -5 formerroomate99 said:

Apr 12, 2013 10:40:05 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

parents get blamed a lot, and they are certainly partially responsible.  but i don't think they have nearly the share of the blame as they are often given credit for.  most parents want their kids well educated.  but if you are working 3 jobs, and living in the projects, it is not going to matter whether you care about your kid's education more than any parent on Earth.  he or she is going to have a tough time of it.

Yes and no.  You don't just wake up one morning and find yourself a parent to a school aged child.  An awful lot of what makes a good parent are the decisions one makes before the child is conceived, getting your shyt together, putting yourself in a position where you have the time and money to do right by your kid.  Of course there are many cases where someone who did get their acts together falls on hard times.  But there are also an awful lot of people who can't be bothered to think before they breed, and the kids end up paying a high price for it.  

again, what % do you think that is?  4%?  14%?, 40%?  94%?

[The Captain]

Well considering in my area some school districts have 80-90+% of the children whose parents can't afford to feed their children (and have for many years even before the financial crisis) the number may be much higher than you care to admit.

 

www.isbe.net/nutrition/htmls/eligibility_listings.htm

Statewide in 2013 more than half the total student population (54%) was eligible for free or reduced lunch,  of that percentage 48% were eligible for free meals (6% for reduced). 

A family of three has to have annual income of less than $25K to qualify.

This tells me there are a lot of people are having children who don't have the ability to provide for something as basic as their food.  But we are somehow supposed to believe that a substantial majority of those parents will have the ability to be heavily invested in their childrens' education?

Now true, some folks may have been hit by the financial crisis, but really?

FWIW my state is not an outlier, these statistics are pretty representative of the national totals.

www.fns.usda.gov/pd/36slmonthly.htm

Now you may try to argue that poverty has nothing to do with a committment to education, however it is identified as one of the leading risk factors for identifying children most likely to drop out of school.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-risk_students

[formerroomate99]

Apr 15, 2013 0:41:12 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Apr 14, 2013 22:04:19 GMT -5 formerroomate99 said:

Yes and no.  You don't just wake up one morning and find yourself a parent to a school aged child.  An awful lot of what makes a good parent are the decisions one makes before the child is conceived, getting your shyt together, putting yourself in a position where you have the time and money to do right by your kid.  Of course there are many cases where someone who did get their acts together falls on hard times.  But there are also an awful lot of people who can't be bothered to think before they breed, and the kids end up paying a high price for it.  

again, what % do you think that is?  4%?  14%?, 40%?  94%?

Look at the illigitimacy rates among the lower classes.  It is more than half.  Having a kid alone when you have marketable skills and a good job are one thing, but doing so when you're working a McJob is something else entirely.  You're setting yourself up for failure.   And look at the timinig of these births.  Yes, the teen pregnancy rates have gone down, but the pregnancy rates in the under 25 set are pretty high in the lower classes, and not many people from a poor background get a family supporting career launched before then. 

[Deleted]

Apr 12, 2013 13:59:22 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Apr 12, 2013 13:44:17 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

We don't. The goal of 100% high school graduation with every student meeting high academic standards is a totally absurdity. To indicate that schools have "failed" because they do not meet this goal is ridiculous.

I lived in a country in Europe for a while were all the kids had to take a test in the sixth grade. 


 

Without fixing our education system it will be much harder for our country to meet challenge of coming century. In global economy everyone's entitled to compete.  

[formerroomate99]

Apr 15, 2013 6:41:12 GMT -5 The Captain said:

Well considering in my area some school districts have 80-90+% of the children whose parents can't afford to feed their children (and have for many years even before the financial crisis) the number may be much higher than you care to admit.

 

www.isbe.net/nutrition/htmls/eligibility_listings.htm

Statewide in 2013 more than half the total student population (54%) was eligible for free or reduced lunch,  of that percentage 48% were eligible for free meals (6% for reduced). 

A family of three has to have annual income of less than $25K to qualify.

This tells me there are a lot of people are having children who don't have the ability to provide for something as basic as their food.  But we are somehow supposed to believe that a substantial majority of those parents will have the ability to be heavily invested in their childrens' education?

Now true, some folks may have been hit by the financial crisis, but really?

FWIW my state is not an outlier, these statistics are pretty representative of the national totals.

www.fns.usda.gov/pd/36slmonthly.htm

Now you may try to argue that poverty has nothing to do with a committment to education, however it is identified as one of the leading risk factors for identifying children most likely to drop out of school.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-risk_students

Ding Ding Ding.  We have a winner. 

[happyhoix]

Now you may try to argue that poverty has nothing to do with a committment to education, however it is identified as one of the leading risk factors for identifying children most likely to drop out of school.

I would argue that a child being poor does not guarantee the child will not succeed.

There are plenty of poor kids, including poor kids born to single working moms, who go on to be very successful.

There are also plenty of middle class and wealthy kids who screw up in school and end up being worthless human beings.

So obviously some parents who lack money are still committed to their children's education, but having money doesn't guarantee the parent will be committed to their kids' education. 

It's not black and white, although some people like to think it is.

 

[Deleted]

Apr 16, 2013 7:08:53 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

It's not black and white, although some people like to think it is.

 

I agree. It's very complicated issues and has many moving parts in it.

[Deleted]

Apr 16, 2013 7:20:49 GMT -5 @lonewolf said:

I'd like to ask....how is it that a child can learn while in a home school, but fails in a public school? 

Good morning, lone. [img]http://images.proboards.com/new/smiley.png[/img]

Maybe the parent's involvement in their Sons and Daughters education. big, maybe...
The heart's matter's children's basic need it to be met from home in that way they can able to concentrating on learning. No school setting can't never replace what children gets from home. That's what I think.

[happyhoix]

Apr 16, 2013 7:20:49 GMT -5 @lonewolf said:

I'd like to ask....how is it that a child can learn while in a home school, but fails in a public school? 

[Deleted]

Love from the parent that built  confidence in children. Maybe.
Secure!!