Homeschooling: Your Views, Please

[P@triot]

And that's it. You can't feel it; you don't get to grok. All you have is an image, and even that isn't the real image but a representation of an image.

Technology has reached the point where there is nearly no difference between a face-to-face meeting and a "virtual" meeting via webcams. In fact, several years ago I witnessed the implementation of clinical robots (specifically the earlier generation of the RP-7i robot in the link below). Physicians from literally across the country would drive the robots through halls, into patient rooms, and then diagnose patients (the robot has built in tools which the patient can connect to themselves for taking blood pressure, heart rate, stethoscope, etc.). I would like to reiterate that this was several years ago - I can't even imagine the technology now.

Don't even attempt to sell me on any perceived "shortcomings" of technology when it is being utilized for a physician to see, diagnose, and treat a patient. The only problem with our current capabilities are your perceptions of it. It is light years beyond the basic requirements necessary for educating children. You wouldn't even need a webcam to teach properly - just audio. The fact that we have streaming video just enhances the experience and expands the instructors tools for knowledge transfer. The fact that we high definition video capabilities has made it so that is nearly no different from being there in person.

RP-7i Robot | InTouch Health

 

[P@triot]

Not only do I realize that, it was forefront in my mind while typing it. A quick dash off to the skankier ghettos of the politics forum (or even, sadly, this thread) reveals in short order how people choose to interact cyberially, that is, when social context is removed. Which serves my point about context; none of us would be sniping at each other in real life the way we do in this fake-reality medium. That's because here, we don't get the whole picture. Because the medium can't do it.

Not true - I've had debates in person (and in public no less) that were every bit as heated and vigorous as I've had here.

But that's besides the point anyway. The backbone to speak out in person vs the comfort of speaking out anonymously has nothing to do with the current capabilities of technology for learning.

Aside from the audio/video capabilities that are almost no different from being in person, technologies even exist for instructors to bring up and control "whiteboards" on the students screen to further explain concepts.

 

[Pogo]

And that's it. You can't feel it; you don't get to grok. All you have is an image, and even that isn't the real image but a representation of an image.

Technology has reached the point where there is nearly no difference between a face-to-face meeting and a "virtual" meeting via webcams. In fact, several years ago I witnessed the implementation of clinical robots (specifically the earlier generation of the RP-7i robot in the link below). Physicians from literally across the country would drive the robots through halls, into patient rooms, and then diagnose patients (the robot has built in tools which the patient can connect to themselves for taking blood pressure, heart rate, stethoscope, etc.). I would like to reiterate that this was several years ago - I can't even imagine the technology now.

Don't even attempt to sell me on any perceived "shortcomings" of technology when it is being utilized for a physician to see, diagnose, and treat a patient. The only problem with our current capabilities are your perceptions of it. It is light years beyond the basic requirements necessary for educating children. You wouldn't even need a webcam to teach properly - just audio. The fact that we have streaming video just enhances the experience and expands the instructors tools for knowledge transfer. The fact that we high definition video capabilities has made it so that is nearly no different from being there in person.

RP-7i Robot | InTouch Health

Then you've completely missed the point.

Everything you describe above -- everything -- is still limited to the one-dimensional sense of sight, or at best, video plus audio. As if that's all there is.

So you've delivered video and audio. That's all you've done-- stripped the experience down to a reproduction of two senses. It's entirely different from being there in person. If the point is to deliver video and audio, well done. If the point is to deliver an experience, learning or otherwise, you haven't scratched the surface.

 

[Pogo]

Not only do I realize that, it was forefront in my mind while typing it. A quick dash off to the skankier ghettos of the politics forum (or even, sadly, this thread) reveals in short order how people choose to interact cyberially, that is, when social context is removed. Which serves my point about context; none of us would be sniping at each other in real life the way we do in this fake-reality medium. That's because here, we don't get the whole picture. Because the medium can't do it.

Not true - I've had debates in person (and in public no less) that were every bit as heated and vigorous as I've had here.

But that's besides the point anyway. The backbone to speak out in person vs the comfort of speaking out anonymously has nothing to do with the current capabilities of technology for learning.

Yeah I think it does, because regardless what the content is, the technology is the same, and that means it has exactly the same limitations in any application.

People who act differently on the internets --and let's be honest, that's rampant -- do so because the surrounding context, the social environment if you will, is not present. We interact via words in a text box. That and an occasional emoticon is all we have. To pretend the breadth of human communication can be expressed therein would be ludicrous.

Same thing in the analogy: to pretend an experience could be reduced to what it looks like through a video camera is just not nearly telling the whole story. It's basically like saying "here's a really good song, listen" -- and then reading the lyrics in a monotone without the music. The video screen is the lyrics, the literal content. What's missing is the music that should be carrying it.

Aside from the audio/video capabilities that are almost no different from being in person, technologies even exist for instructors to bring up and control "whiteboards" on the students screen to further explain concepts.

And that's still, no matter how many elements you cite, a reduction to an image on a screen. Doesn't matter how many different images you can put on there or what thier content is, they all still have that same limitation. It's an electronic image of an experience; it is in no way the experience. No more than a photograph is.

Frankly this is why television never achieved any higher purpose than being a propaganda machine designed to sell products conveyed on cheap LCD "vast wasteland" programming. Because that's all the technology can handle. It doesn't do nuance or deeper meaning -- because it can't do it. It can handle splashy ads, cheap sitcoms and a weather map. Anything deeper than that, it's sensually impotent.

Again, bottom line: an image and an audio track of an experience is in no way all there is to that experience. No more than the tree you see outside your window consists of nothing more than what you can see above the ground. It matters.

 

[Esmeralda]

What the hell do you think your doing right now? LOL

That's not debate. Debating is the exchange of ideas, and having them tested, formally. Political, social, religious, philosophical, scientific, and moral. Do you share my views on homeschooling, or differ a bit? Are there things in homeschooling you believe could be improved on? If you share my beliefs on homeschooling then, hey, we agree on something. So let's come up with ways to make it even better for the next generations.

I exchange my ideas.... You just dont like the the language I use. Sorry but I am not into the whole fascist thing.

Civility = Fascism?? Interesting.

 

[Pogo]

That's not debate. Debating is the exchange of ideas, and having them tested, formally. Political, social, religious, philosophical, scientific, and moral. Do you share my views on homeschooling, or differ a bit? Are there things in homeschooling you believe could be improved on? If you share my beliefs on homeschooling then, hey, we agree on something. So let's come up with ways to make it even better for the next generations.

I exchange my ideas.... You just dont like the the language I use. Sorry but I am not into the whole fascist thing.

Civility = Fascism?? Interesting.

Makes a fine sig line too.

 

[Esmeralda]

No offense to teachers, the absolutely most noble profession, but I wish home schooling had been an option. I hated every minute of school from literally the first day of first grade to the day of HS graduation. Loathed, detested, pick your verb. It's a cookie cutter factory that squelches creativity, destroys personality and visits authoritarian bullshit on innocent children that never needed it. It grinds out obedient drones of lobotomized character and traumatized psyche. I never want to go through another experience like that as long as I live.

So uh, I guess I vote "yes".

Most Noble profession???? Even more so then laying down your life for your freedom???? Oh yea I forget I am talking to a progressive, they hates soldiers

Making sweeping generalizations doesn't help your position at all. For example, my screen name is taken from a JD Salinger short story "For Esme with Love and Squalor," which "was conceived as a tribute to those Second World War veterans who in post-war civilian life were still suffering from so-called "battle fatigue" – post-traumatic stress disorder." wiki

I don't hate soldiers, and I am pretty sure I am not an isolated case among liberals and progressives. Far from isolated.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and no offense to Pogo, but I think fire fighters, nurses, paramedics, and police officers (those who do their best to serve and protect) are also most noble professions. I think teachers in America are vilified, and that is very bad for American education. In other countries teachers are respected, and those other countries have better educational outcomes (those countries also have teacher unions). The public having little to no respect for teachers is one of the biggest problems in American education.

 

[Esmeralda]

Then maybe you should have read where TheNutHouse started this shit before putting your foot in your mouth.



Once again, what you think can bite my ass. What you tried to do is re-engineer what *I* think. Bringing in other professions, into my quote, completely off the topic? Who the **** do you think you are, little man?

So yes you absolutely ARE into the whole fascist thing. That's why your ironic confession flies in my sig line. With a link for all to see your idiocy. Trust me, the day when you get to dictate what other people think is the day pigs fly over frozen Hades.

There is one difference between home schooling and regular school which I'm not sure has been addressed; I've not read every post in the entire thread.

When you have more than one student involved in a learning situation, you have more than one brain and more than one perspective. Hearing and understanding what others think and how others perceive things, having dialogue with others on any issue, etc., is also part of the learning process. In a situation where you have only one student and a teacher/parent, your dialogue is very limited. In the classroom, students have an immeasurable amount of intellectual interaction with others; this enriches the learning process no end. IMO this is a hugely important issue and suggests to me that the multiple student classroom is far more appropriate for leaning than a single parent/teacher learning environment. One of the most significant ways of developing the mind and acquiring knowledge is collaborative learning, i.e., group work. You don't get that at home with just mom. As well, one of the best ways of learning is teaching, and in group work situations, the stronger students tend to become 'teachers,' which deepens their own understanding of what they are studying. Weaker students become more involved in their learning instead of being passive learners. It's a win, win, win situation which you don't, as I said, get in a one to one learning situation.

You would be correct.....If it was 1994 instead of 2014.

See there's something now called "the internet:" This allows interaction with others on a scale you may not be able to conceive.

Go to your library. They probably have a book about the "World Wide Web" that will explain the subject better.

Non-human to human interaction though technology is not in any sense the same as direct in-person human to human interaction. I am amazed that any thinking individual would believe such a thing: to me, it is obvious that interacting with someone over the phone or internet is absolutely not the same as interacting in person. Just watch a group of people interacting together, in person, discussing an issue or solving a problem; then watch the same with an internet group. With an internet group, you can see there are all kinds of lapses and pauses, uncountable 'misses' in communication, etc. As well, studies have made it clear that body language is the largest element in human communication.

The program I work within has regular workshops to keep us up to date and learn new material. A few years ago, all of these workshops were in person, and we had to travel to a specific site for the workshop. Nowadays, there are internet workshops which are cheaper because there is no travel cost, no hotel cost and the payment for the workshop leader is less. However, these internet workshops do not compare with the in-person type. Every colleague I have spoken to on the matter says the same thing: they much prefer and learn a lot more during the in-person workshop with a group of people and an instructor.

As well, where is the home schooled child to get groups to do a lot of internet lessons with? It doesn't happen now, and is not likely to happen. So your position is extremely weak. In-person group learning is far more effective than interacting with someone over the internet. Arranging over the internet group (collaborative) learning is not now being done as a part of home schooling and is impractical to contemplate as something that will be done in the future.

As a last note Samson: are you attempting with your comments about 1944 and going to the library to learn about the internet trying to insult me about my age? So you are an ageist? Your comments clarify in many ways your lack of knowledge about the wider world and just intellectual capacity in general, as well as your lack of education. BTW, I was born long after WWII, and I imagine I've been on the internet as long as you have, and, in fact, use it every day in my work. Your attempt to insult me only illustrates what is lacking on your part.

 

[Pogo]

There is one difference between home schooling and regular school which I'm not sure has been addressed; I've not read every post in the entire thread.

When you have more than one student involved in a learning situation, you have more than one brain and more than one perspective. Hearing and understanding what others think and how others perceive things, having dialogue with others on any issue, etc., is also part of the learning process. In a situation where you have only one student and a teacher/parent, your dialogue is very limited. In the classroom, students have an immeasurable amount of intellectual interaction with others; this enriches the learning process no end. IMO this is a hugely important issue and suggests to me that the multiple student classroom is far more appropriate for leaning than a single parent/teacher learning environment. One of the most significant ways of developing the mind and acquiring knowledge is collaborative learning, i.e., group work. You don't get that at home with just mom. As well, one of the best ways of learning is teaching, and in group work situations, the stronger students tend to become 'teachers,' which deepens their own understanding of what they are studying. Weaker students become more involved in their learning instead of being passive learners. It's a win, win, win situation which you don't, as I said, get in a one to one learning situation.

You would be correct.....If it was 1994 instead of 2014.

See there's something now called "the internet:" This allows interaction with others on a scale you may not be able to conceive.

Go to your library. They probably have a book about the "World Wide Web" that will explain the subject better.

Non-human to human interaction though technology is not in any sense the same as direct in person human to human interaction. I am amazed that any thinking individual would believe such a thing: to me, it is obvious that interacting with someone over the phone or internet is absolutely not the same as interacting in person. Just watch a group of people interacting together, in person, discussing an issue or solving problem, then watch the same with an internet group. With an internet group, you can see there are all kinds of lapses and pauses, uncountable 'misses' in communication, etc. As well, studies have made it clear that body language is the largest element in human communication.

The program I work within has regular workshops to keep us up to date and learn new material. A few years ago, all of these workshops were in person, and we had to travel to site for the workshop. Nowadays, there are internet workshops which are cheaper because there is no travel cost, no hotel cost and the payment for the workshop leader is less. However, these internet workshops do not compare with the in-person one. Every colleague I have spoken to on the matter says the same thing: they much prefer and learn a lot more during the in-person workshop with a group of people and an instructor.

As well, where is the home schooled child to get groups to do a lot of internet lessons with? It doesn't happen now, and is not likely to happen. So your position is extremely weak. In-person group learning far more effective than interacting with someone over the internet. Arranging over the internet group (collaborative) learning is not being done as a part of home schooling and is impractical to contemplate as something that will be done.

Indeed, a major part of the corporate work that I do is facilitating electronic tools (recording, streaming, etc) for corporate and CE (continuing education) seminars. The technology is certainly by now widely available to skip the physical travel and do a Go-to-Meeting. You can sit in, you can stream, you can watch/listen to a lecture that was given earlier, you can even interact live. It's easy to do.

Has any of this technology slowed the practice of traveling to conventions and seminars? Not one iota. In fact, what's been declining, or at least at a plateau, is the technology side. Over the years no matter how much it's been used in myriad forms, the technological connection has failed to be seen as anything more than a weak substitute for being there -- something to fall back on when you couldn't be there.

There simply is no substitute for the real thing.

 

[Unkotare]

In other countries teachers are respected, and those other countries have better educational outcomes

In what sense?

 

[Unkotare]

Over the years no matter how much it's been used in myriad forms, the technological connection has failed to be seen as anything more than a weak substitute for being there -- something to fall back on when you couldn't be there.

There simply is no substitute for the real thing.

That's overgeneralizing.

 

[MaxGrit]

And that's it. You can't feel it; you don't get to grok. All you have is an image, and even that isn't the real image but a representation of an image.

Technology has reached the point where there is nearly no difference between a face-to-face meeting and a "virtual" meeting via webcams. In fact, several years ago I witnessed the implementation of clinical robots (specifically the earlier generation of the RP-7i robot in the link below). Physicians from literally across the country would drive the robots through halls, into patient rooms, and then diagnose patients (the robot has built in tools which the patient can connect to themselves for taking blood pressure, heart rate, stethoscope, etc.). I would like to reiterate that this was several years ago - I can't even imagine the technology now.

Don't even attempt to sell me on any perceived "shortcomings" of technology when it is being utilized for a physician to see, diagnose, and treat a patient. The only problem with our current capabilities are your perceptions of it. It is light years beyond the basic requirements necessary for educating children. You wouldn't even need a webcam to teach properly - just audio. The fact that we have streaming video just enhances the experience and expands the instructors tools for knowledge transfer. The fact that we high definition video capabilities has made it so that is nearly no different from being there in person.

RP-7i Robot | InTouch Health

Obviously there is a difference.

 

[MaxGrit]

Over the years no matter how much it's been used in myriad forms, the technological connection has failed to be seen as anything more than a weak substitute for being there -- something to fall back on when you couldn't be there.

There simply is no substitute for the real thing.

That's overgeneralizing.

Actually it's infinitely true.

 

[Esmeralda]

And that's it. You can't feel it; you don't get to grok. All you have is an image, and even that isn't the real image but a representation of an image.

Technology has reached the point where there is nearly no difference between a face-to-face meeting and a "virtual" meeting via webcams. In fact, several years ago I witnessed the implementation of clinical robots (specifically the earlier generation of the RP-7i robot in the link below). Physicians from literally across the country would drive the robots through halls, into patient rooms, and then diagnose patients (the robot has built in tools which the patient can connect to themselves for taking blood pressure, heart rate, stethoscope, etc.). I would like to reiterate that this was several years ago - I can't even imagine the technology now.

Don't even attempt to sell me on any perceived "shortcomings" of technology when it is being utilized for a physician to see, diagnose, and treat a patient. The only problem with our current capabilities are your perceptions of it. It is light years beyond the basic requirements necessary for educating children. You wouldn't even need a webcam to teach properly - just audio. The fact that we have streaming video just enhances the experience and expands the instructors tools for knowledge transfer. The fact that we high definition video capabilities has made it so that is nearly no different from being there in person.

RP-7i Robot | InTouch Health

Then you've completely missed the point.

Everything you describe above -- everything -- is still limited to the one-dimensional sense of sight, or at best, video plus audio. As if that's all there is.

So you've delivered video and audio. That's all you've done-- stripped the experience down to a reproduction of two senses. It's entirely different from being there in person. If the point is to deliver video and audio, well done. If the point is to deliver an experience, learning or otherwise, you haven't scratched the surface.

As well, teaching and learning is not about feeding people information. It's about the interaction of minds. It's about having a relationship with your teachers and your classmates, an intellectual and real relationship where all kinds of knowledge and ideas are shared and examined. That doesn't happen in an experience that is technological. There are too many limitations.

In any case, we are talking about the reality of homeschooling, which does not include nor have access to such technology as is presented here; and the prospect of students who are home schooled having such technology available to them is practically nil any time soon.

 

[Unkotare]

Over the years no matter how much it's been used in myriad forms, the technological connection has failed to be seen as anything more than a weak substitute for being there -- something to fall back on when you couldn't be there.

There simply is no substitute for the real thing.

That's overgeneralizing.

Actually it's infinitely true.

Actually, that's hyperbole.

 

[thanatos144]

That's not debate. Debating is the exchange of ideas, and having them tested, formally. Political, social, religious, philosophical, scientific, and moral. Do you share my views on homeschooling, or differ a bit? Are there things in homeschooling you believe could be improved on? If you share my beliefs on homeschooling then, hey, we agree on something. So let's come up with ways to make it even better for the next generations.

I exchange my ideas.... You just dont like the the language I use. Sorry but I am not into the whole fascist thing.

Civility = Fascism?? Interesting.

forced civility does.

 

[thanatos144]

No offense to teachers, the absolutely most noble profession, but I wish home schooling had been an option. I hated every minute of school from literally the first day of first grade to the day of HS graduation. Loathed, detested, pick your verb. It's a cookie cutter factory that squelches creativity, destroys personality and visits authoritarian bullshit on innocent children that never needed it. It grinds out obedient drones of lobotomized character and traumatized psyche. I never want to go through another experience like that as long as I live.

So uh, I guess I vote "yes".

Most Noble profession???? Even more so then laying down your life for your freedom???? Oh yea I forget I am talking to a progressive, they hates soldiers

Making sweeping generalizations doesn't help your position at all. For example, my screen name is taken from a JD Salinger short story "For Esme with Love and Squalor," which "was conceived as a tribute to those Second World War veterans who in post-war civilian life were still suffering from so-called "battle fatigue" – post-traumatic stress disorder." wiki

I don't hate soldiers, and I am pretty sure I am not an isolated case among liberals and progressives. Far from isolated.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and no offense to Pogo, but I think fire fighters, nurses, paramedics, and police officers (those who do their best to serve and protect) are also most noble professions. I think teachers in America are vilified, and that is very bad for American education. In other countries teachers are respected, and those other countries have better educational outcomes (those countries also have teacher unions). The public having little to no respect for teachers is one of the biggest problems in American education.

I am sure you love soldiers as long as they stay off your grass and dont date your daughters. Just like all you progressives treat black folk.

 

[P@triot]

And that's it. You can't feel it; you don't get to grok. All you have is an image, and even that isn't the real image but a representation of an image.

Technology has reached the point where there is nearly no difference between a face-to-face meeting and a "virtual" meeting via webcams. In fact, several years ago I witnessed the implementation of clinical robots (specifically the earlier generation of the RP-7i robot in the link below). Physicians from literally across the country would drive the robots through halls, into patient rooms, and then diagnose patients (the robot has built in tools which the patient can connect to themselves for taking blood pressure, heart rate, stethoscope, etc.). I would like to reiterate that this was several years ago - I can't even imagine the technology now.

Don't even attempt to sell me on any perceived "shortcomings" of technology when it is being utilized for a physician to see, diagnose, and treat a patient. The only problem with our current capabilities are your perceptions of it. It is light years beyond the basic requirements necessary for educating children. You wouldn't even need a webcam to teach properly - just audio. The fact that we have streaming video just enhances the experience and expands the instructors tools for knowledge transfer. The fact that we high definition video capabilities has made it so that is nearly no different from being there in person.

RP-7i Robot | InTouch Health

Then you've completely missed the point.

Everything you describe above -- everything -- is still limited to the one-dimensional sense of sight, or at best, video plus audio. As if that's all there is.

So you've delivered video and audio. That's all you've done-- stripped the experience down to a reproduction of two senses. It's entirely different from being there in person. If the point is to deliver video and audio, well done. If the point is to deliver an experience, learning or otherwise, you haven't scratched the surface.

You're missing the point - the experience is so complete, they are actually treating patients remotely. You want to believe there is some exhilarating, heart-pounding experience by sitting in a classroom and it simply isn't true. There is nothing being missed by online learning. Nothing. They wouldn't dare treat patients virtually if something was being missed. Period.

 

[P@triot]

People who act differently on the internets --and let's be honest, that's rampant -- do so because the surrounding context, the social environment if you will, is not present. We interact via words in a text box. That and an occasional emoticon is all we have. To pretend the breadth of human communication can be expressed therein would be ludicrous.

What is ludicrous is pretending over and over and over (as you keep doing) that online learning is the same thing as USMB - and it's not. Online learning is not anonymous like USMB is. Online learning is not limited to typing like USMB. Online learning has video to see everything - just like you were there in person. Online learning has audio to hear everything - just like you were there in person.

Why do you keep disingenuously pretending that our experience on USMB is the exact same format/experience of online learning? I know damn well you're not that dumb. Which means you are lying on purpose. So stop it. Online learning is not limited to posting text in little boxes with emoticons and you know it.

 

[P@triot]

No offense to teachers, the absolutely most noble profession, but I wish home schooling had been an option. I hated every minute of school from literally the first day of first grade to the day of HS graduation. Loathed, detested, pick your verb. It's a cookie cutter factory that squelches creativity, destroys personality and visits authoritarian bullshit on innocent children that never needed it. It grinds out obedient drones of lobotomized character and traumatized psyche. I never want to go through another experience like that as long as I live.

So uh, I guess I vote "yes".

Most Noble profession???? Even more so then laying down your life for your freedom???? Oh yea I forget I am talking to a progressive, they hates soldiers

Making sweeping generalizations doesn't help your position at all. For example, my screen name is taken from a JD Salinger short story "For Esme with Love and Squalor," which "was conceived as a tribute to those Second World War veterans who in post-war civilian life were still suffering from so-called "battle fatigue" – post-traumatic stress disorder." wiki

I don't hate soldiers, and I am pretty sure I am not an isolated case among liberals and progressives. Far from isolated.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and no offense to Pogo, but I think fire fighters, nurses, paramedics, and police officers (those who do their best to serve and protect) are also most noble professions. I think teachers in America are vilified, and that is very bad for American education. In other countries teachers are respected, and those other countries have better educational outcomes (those countries also have teacher unions). The public having little to no respect for teachers is one of the biggest problems in American education.

Teachers are not vilified in America - the ignorant liberal agenda of indoctrinating children and the greedy unions are what are vilified in America.