Another homeschool critic with an completely illogical argument

This person clearly didn't think out her argument before sending this opinion piece.


Her first argument against homeschooling- Time and money

A significant example is the amount of time - not to mention money - it takes to
prepare and teach daily lessons and organize activities. Parents who chose to
home-school would have little time to themselves and would have to pay for most
of the resources needed to educate their children.

Hmmm, I think I'll agree with her on this one. Homeschooling can take great amounts of time, energy and money.

Her second argument against homeschooling- Resources and money

It is unlikely many parents can match the resources offered by a
government-funded school system.

Homeschoolers educate their children (on average, according to study after study) better than the public school can. Not only that... we do it on FAR LESS money!

Her third argument against homeschooling- Socialization...
First she says,

But perhaps the greatest disadvantage is the difficulty in developing social
skills. Social skills cannot be learned merely through everyday
interactions, such as trips to the mall, church, sports and clubs or
visiting with neighbours.

Next she says,

It is that lack of exposure to the real world that poses a
danger for home-schooled children, particularly those who are taught by their
parents right through their teen years.

Hmmm, where did those everyday interactions occur? LOL, in the real world, of course. (I told you it was an illogical argument, right?)


Okay, school is in session. I would like to introduce the definition of socialization to this author. Apparently the poor dear doesn't really know what the word means.

socialization (′sō·shə·lə′zā·shən)
(psychology) The process whereby a child learns to get along with and to behave similarly to other people in the group, largely through imitation as well as group pressure.

Her fourth argument against homeschooling- Expose them young

Simply hearing about the dangers of life is not a substitute for reality. What
has always been forbidden or mysterious - be it alcohol, drugs or sex - can
become too great of a temptation to resist for some of these home-schooled youth
who may be intent on taking part in much they'd missed as quickly as possible.

Think about this logically for a moment.
She is literally arguing that the timing of the exposure should be when they are younger.
She is literally saying children should be exposed to alcohol, drugs and sex at a young age.

I dunno about you folks, but I think there should be laws against this type of action. I certainly wouldn't encourage it. Other wise you are encouraging unlawful behavior in a minor. That's kind of a no brainer, isn't it?