Homeschooling

Thank you for that counterargument. To begin, you do realize that Wikipedia is managed by a team of hundreds of professional moderators, a majority of which are holders of PhD's or other higher academic accreditations in their respective fields? You also realize that, in order to edit Wikipedia, one must register as a member, and more than three very incorrect/stupid 'edits' to the site in a reasonably short amount of time will result in one being permanently banned from ever joining or editing again? I'm sure there is a little bit of bias, but Wikipedia prides itself on its outstanding *lack* of bias; if it's there, it's pointed out, or removed in a short frame of time. You do also realize that all information contained within Wikipedia must also be referenced using reliable, fully cited sources, yes? Honestly, it's in the top 0.2% of most reliable Internet information, and whoever told you otherwise doesn't know how the site works. As to your argument that the end of term testing is, in fact, compulsory, that simply is not the case everywhere. In fact, in a *majority* of states and countries where it's allowed it's entirely voluntary. I accept your position that it's compulsory where you live, but that is not the case everywhere, and that by no means refutes my arguments relating to this factor. The specific nature of this test also varies by state and country, and citing the test where you live as being top notch only minimally aids your argument. I'll accept your argument that "...the majority of homeschool student take classes", as I have little to refute that statement, at least in your state. You don't see the fact that you are "...more on our own than public school kids because we only see our teachers once or twice a week" to be somewhat detrimental to your education? There's a reason that teachers are supposed to be available to help their students both in class and out. I also disagree with your claim that the government's involvement in education would somehow make it "...that much more susceptible to corruption and lethargy". How? The government's only job is to pay the teacher's salaries, and set the standard of education. The exact same standard that home-schools are *supposed* to be following as well. Your third paragraph is meaningless. I never stated belief or leaning of any sort toward that point of view, nor is it important. I don't think any save possibly a minority of home-schooled children are "uneducated, brainwashed, socially awkward, religious freaks", nor do I think it's okay to brand them as such. I agree that "every situation has "outcasts", but that also doesn't matter; that isn't grounds for pulling them out of school to try and teach them yourself. Unless the person teaching you also has a higher education of the same level paid teachers are *required* to have, the standard of education being offered *will* otherwise suffer because of that choice. I'm well aware that home-schooled children have "opportunities for socialization", and I am aware that there are, in many cases, organizations specifically for them to socialize. Those organizations should be unnecessary, though; genuine, informal socialization, of the sort that occurs in the school environment, is somewhat more 'healthy', from a psychological perspective, than having to specifically go out of your way to socialize, or being made to 'be social' in what is supposed to be your own free time. I'll have to agree with your argument that a teacher can, and in fact likely will, put some of their own 'ideology' onto the information they're passing to children when teaching. The fact is that teachers, in publicly funded schools, are supposed to teach facts, with no influence on what or how they teach from their own view on those facts. A parent who really wants their child to succeed academically could also just tutor them privately at home in addition to sending them to school. As I have stated, regardless of your "being held to a standard", all schools, public, private and home, are held to that exact same standard; there's no reason for there to be significant differences in academic achievement levels between them aside from the individual levels and types of incentives given to learn in individual schools. I agree in part with your final paragraph; your education *should* be "an awesome, and amazing experience", you *should* crave knowledge about the world. *All* schools are supposed to provide that standard of education; any that don't aren't indicative of what a public education is *supposed* to provide. I understand that all who are being taught are being "taught a certain way". That's simply how education works, and it by no means is restricted to government funded schools. Every single school, public, private and home, in every country, simply by definition *must* teach their students "a certain way" in order to get that information across to them. There aren't any truly, 100% objective ways to only teach fact with no kind of input of any other kind, because that simply isn't how the human mind is designed to take in information. Public schools are designed to try and keep the education process as impartial and informative as possible, however. All students are supposed to have to "think for themselves"; if they didn't, they would never actually take in any of the information they're being taught, and would be relegated to less intellectually challenging classes and topics regardless of how or where they were taught. More sources: 1) http://en.wikipedia.org... 2) http://en.wikipedia.org... 3) http://en.wikipedia.org... 4) http://en.wikipedia.org... 5) http://www.livescience.com... 6) http://news.cnet.com... 7) http://library.blogs.delaware.gov...