So is high school.

Homeschooling is worthless? Then how is it that we are smarter than you?

I've know PLENTY of dumbass homeschool kids. not to mention how ridiculously socially awkward they usually are. it's awful...I'd avoid homeschooling a child at all costs,.. I always felt so sorry for them when they tried to integrate into regular schools again. It was so sad to watch.

How is it you don't know that generalizations aren't good arguments?

The dumbass homeschooled kids are the ones that have been kicked out of every other school. The socially awkward ones are the kids with psycho parents who shelter the crap out of them. Then there's the almost normal ones who attend classes two days out of the week with other homeschoolers and publish novels when they're thirteen years old. Notice that I say almost normal. I never said they were normal, or that they weren't weird. Hah. Just smart.

public high schools are what? useless and a drain on society? what is a drain on society is rich ***** who know nothing about the benefits of not being sheltered all your life. home schooling and public schooling each have their benefits and pitfalls, but nothing as bad as private schoolers who get into top notch schools because of their brand-name education.

Of course. I knew someone with the mentality that rich, productive people that provide jobs, services and innovation would be the drain on society and not the teachers union that constantly demands more more MORE for less and less. Private schoolers don't automatically get in because of a brand-name education, they're judged on their grades and accomplishments as well. If they get a "B" in a really difficult school, it'll look better than an "A" in any public school class. You are assuming that all rich people have been sheltered, when often the opposite is true, working their way up from nothing. You are so brainwashed it's pathetic.

Kitsune I have a few major issues with what you said. 1) We're talking about high-schoolers. Sure the parents may have made their way up from nothing, but the kids have not. The kids are just kids, who go along with what their parents tell them. 2) I do not approve of your comment about public school teachers. They aren't all giving less, and they aren't all demanding more. At least where I'm from, they aren't asking for raises, they're asking to not laid off. When I went to school my class was around 22-25 kids. Now all the classes in my town and the surrounding towns are about 45 students per room, because we can't afford to keep the teachers. No ones getting any pay raises anymore either. 3) Not all public schools are crappy. I went to Sturgis Charter Public School. Look it up if you want more info on that school specifically. My school offers the International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme, which, as indicated by its name, is an internationally recognized diploma. Typically it's compared in the US to the AP program. Now I would hope that my A/7 in a Higher Level IB class would get a little more consideration than than a B from a regular class at a private school. Maybe I'm naive to hope that. It probably shouldn't matter much since I've graduated, but it would upset me to know that I have friends working their asses off for A's and 7's and they'll be a second choice to a student with a B average.

I appreciate your organized response and your lack of insults. Thank you. 1) Even with high schoolers I think you're allowing shows like NYC prep to truly blind you. Not all rich children grow up to be Paris Hilton. There are quite a lot of rich children that grow up to be successful because, yes they may have had an advantage in daddy's company, but even work hard and work their way up from the mail room. It happens, and it's ridiculous to say that rich kids are bad because they're rich when the only real support you have is extremes that are on TV or in the news. There are so many that aren't reported on because it's not dramatic news. 2) Of course they aren't getting anymore raises - because they're not performing! People are beginning to vote against demands for more money because they don't believe teachers are doing a good job. I'm in California for example. We had some propositions up on May 19th where the teachers union were demanding more money so they wouldn't have to lay off teachers. Sounds scary, right? Until you think about this - California teachers are the HIGHEST paid teachers in the nation. But in cities like LA, the drop out rate is still over 50%! Why would we want to keep teachers that suck at their job? And why do they need more money to not get laid off? I know a district that instead of asking for more money so they wouldn't get laid off, everyone simply took a 3% pay decrease. Not much for a single person, but in the end everyone got to keep their job. The only solution is not more money, but that's what the teachers union always touts when they say it's "for the children". And don't even get me started on the horrors of Tenure. John Stossel did a great documentary on this and it caused me to do a lot of research on my own. I do recommend watching that. 3) A charter school is not an everyday public school. In fact they are rather in a class of their own. My point that you seemed to miss is that a student that attends a notoriously difficult school for gifted children who received a B average will be looked more favorably than a student attending PUBLIC school. Charter schools are up there with good private schools depending on the program. So good for you and your friends for working hard since that's what it truly takes to make it to the top.

I try my best not to insults people, so thank you for noticing :) 1) I wasn't intending to say anything bad about rich kids. I have no problem with them having money and going to whatever school they please and can afford. If they prefer that over a regular public school and can afford it, then that's good for them if it makes them happy. I was just stating that by definition they had not worked their way up from nothing. It wasn't to say that they were lazy or had to rely on their parents. Just a comment on their different upbringing. 2) My point was not that they weren't getting any more raises, but that they were not asking for any more raises. based on teh point you made about last May it seems i'm wrong anyways, but at least where I'm from, they were not asking for raises. Haven't in years. Everyone's been making the same that they were making in 2003, and still more teachers are getting laid off, because they schools are now getting less funding. Pay-cuts for next year are being considered and very few of the teachers are against them. Better to make less money than to make no money because you got laid off. The teachers who are still working are teacher upwards of 44 students per class. That's fine for the highschools because if they should have enough study skills to be somewhat self sufficient and they (hopefully) are not running around and being disruptive, but if you're teaching second grade 44 kids is a load that's going to be nearly impossible to handle, because with young children, a lot of them don't do well with individual work, and really need the one-on-one interaction to be able to begin to understand the material. I'm majoring in elementary education and have always dreamed of little second graders, but I'm seriously considering changing that to secondary because I don't think I'd be able to keep 44 seven-year-olds under control at any one time, never mind actually teaching them. I think it might be easier with older kids, who are a little calmer, and have a better understanding of how to act in a classroom environment. That being said, I do feel that a lot of schools are lacking and that it's partially the teachers fault. There is far too much laziness happening, because they just don't care anymore, which is the fault of the administrators. Teachers follow what's in the curriculum. Principals set the curriculum based on the laws. The laws say "by fifth grade a student should be able to do this, this, and this which should be done this way, and also be able to take whatever standardized test we throw at them.". The teachers go "okay here's what we need to learn. And here's a test we need to pass." Most teachers hate the standardized testing, and having to teach the kids just for that, but what are they going to do? Not take the test? They'll lose their job, and the school board will find someone else to administer the test. They're afraid to lose their jobs so they teach the material given to them, regardless of how they feel about it. Yes there are certain things that they should be required to teach, but they also should be allowed to teach it in any way they please. Even now I got told off for doing something 'the wrong way' even though it gets the same end result. A lot of 'how to teach' is being put into the curriculum recently. 3) I don't feel that a charter school really is different from a public school. Sure you have to choose to go there, but in reality, don't you have to choose to go to a regular high school too? You can drop out if you don't want to be there. Yes, I agree that if you get out of a harder school your grade should be weighted, but private school does not necessarily mean higher standard of education. Some private schools offer the same academic difficulty, but specialize in something. Others are based off of religions, or else exist just to provide a different option away from social pressures of the town/district school. They do not have to offer a higher academic standard. Regular public schools can also offer advanced programs. The IB program is also offered at many regular public high schools.

I can see there has been a bit of misinterpretation on this particular bit of our discussion. I was responding to someone else who complained about rich people being the actual problem. When you said to talk about highschoolers I went off on that particular tangent. I apologize for the misunderstanding, but it seems we're in agreement anyway, haha! I think that overcrowding in schools is not a reason to give more funding to public schools, but it should serve as inspiration for parents to consider other option - such as homeschooling. Especially with young children it's not difficult, there's a lot of support out there for teaching k-5 especially. It's basically another example of why public schools are a PROBLEM, even if it's not the teachers screwing it up, it's overcrowded and expensive and the kids aren't getting the education they deserve when they could by making a simple adjustment in lifestyle on the parents part. Once again you've given another point as to why public schools are terrible. With standardized testing bringing grades DOWN despite deceptively high scores on the tests (since teachers are only so willing to teach children how to cheat-without-really-cheating rather than actually studying. I mean really, who needs to practice filling in bubbles with a #2 pencil for three hours?) and progressive and proven methods of teaching being shot down by the "administration" who would WANT their child in a public school? No, you can't actually drop out of highschool LEGALLY until you are 18. Of course kids do it all the time, but it is a choice, as much as shoplifting, ordering food or riding a plane. Fact is if the kids that don't want to be are simply wasting resources rather than having them used on children that WANT to learn and be better. Charter school is different from public schools because they aren't zoned. Which means you can choose to travel to that school if you want to. You can only attend a public school if you are zoned for it. Charter schools can make money by being good and having kids travel to go to them, whereas the average public schools will get stuck with the dregs that no one else wants. It's a pit of despair and failure. Sure there are some that rise up, but obviously the average success rate is a lot lower. You are absolutely right that not every private school is better academically. But they usually have something going for them that makes people want to PAY money to go to school, rather than get a free education. So besides religion most private schools have much more advanced curriculum or opportunities. Competition is higher amongst students and produces much better grades, so even if the curriculum isn't better, the average score is. Once again, public schools lose.