Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Home SchoolingFollow

#102 Mar 12 2008 at 5:12 PM Rating: Default
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts


How many have you found supporting your argument Smash?


I'd say about 10000000 times as many as peer reviewed journal published studies you can cite. Actually, make that 100000000000000000000 times as many.

If we lived in a world where the number of internet sites supporting something was a measure of veracity, Jesus would currently be disbanding the Libertarian collective.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#103 Mar 12 2008 at 5:41 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Smasharoo wrote:


How many have you found supporting your argument Smash?


I'd say about 10000000 times as many as peer reviewed journal published studies you can cite. Actually, make that 100000000000000000000 times as many.



Well. Since there are so many, you should have no problems finding one and citing it, right?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#104 Mar 12 2008 at 5:43 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

Well. Since there are so many, you should have no problems finding one and citing it, right?


Not at all.

As soon as you cite one to support your original lie, I'll be happy to cite five to refute it. Although, seeing as that can't possibly happen because you just lied randomly and hoped, I won't hold my breath for one.



Edited, Mar 12th 2008 9:43pm by Smasharoo
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#105 Mar 12 2008 at 5:59 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Are we playing the "your source isn't good enough" game now?


You're kidding, right?


Any cite Smash. Any time now...
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#106 Mar 12 2008 at 6:33 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

Any cite Smash. Any time now...


Any cite that does what now? Proves you wrong? Trivial. What would I gain though, you're wrong already. The consensus is that you're wrong. I know you're wrong. You're incapable of accepting that you're wrong. No matter what I cite, the situation will remain the same.

You, on the other hand, have the opportunity to change the minds of people about this, and yet, you don't?

WHY? Oh, right, because you can't, so you waste everyone's time attacking me. Whatever makes you happy, I guess. You're still wrong, and we all know you won't do anything to change that because you're not capable. Let's be honest, if it doesn't show up in the first page of Google, it doesn't exist for you.

Sad, but there you have it.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#107 Mar 12 2008 at 6:53 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Smasharoo wrote:

Any cite Smash. Any time now...


Any cite that does what now? Proves you wrong? Trivial.


Then do it. Find a source that provides any sort of data showing that homeschooled kids scores on standardized test, or college entrance exams, or via any other empirical comparison methodology, are worse then those of public school students.


Any source will do Smash. You know you're wrong. Why keep insisting you're right?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#108 Mar 12 2008 at 6:55 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

Then do it. Find a source that provides any sort of data showing that homeschooled kids scores on standardized test, or college entrance exams, or via any other empirical comparison methodology, are worse then those of public school students.


Any source will do Smash.


When I do, will you just post "Ok, I was wrong." ?

Because I have the page open Acrobat reader as we speak, and while it's an interesting paper, I still see no incentive to link it here.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#109 Mar 12 2008 at 7:03 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
And Here is an example of "empirical data".


Nation wide ACT Scores:

Average general ed high school program: 19.6

Average homeschooled: 22.5


I could list off 10 years of ACT score and show that homeschooled kids did better then the average public school students every single year.


Your turn.

Edited, Mar 12th 2008 8:03pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#110 Mar 12 2008 at 7:04 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Smasharoo wrote:

Because I have the page open Acrobat reader as we speak, and while it's an interesting paper, I still see no incentive to link it here.



Yes. And McCarthy had a "list" of confirmed communist spies in his hand...


Still waiting Smash.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#111 Mar 12 2008 at 7:05 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

Yes. And McCarthy had a "list" of confirmed communist spies in his hand...


Still waiting Smash.


Ok? You could go on Google Scholar and look it up instead of waiting and just link it yourself if you're so fascinated. I suppose anyone could.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#112 Mar 12 2008 at 7:15 PM Rating: Decent
****
9,997 posts
I'm going to interject before I look at any sources.

Whatever studies you find are only going to show a very narrow advantage or disadvantage of home schooling. Unless you can find a study that takes a comprehensive look at success in the workplace, emotional stability, and social adaptability/morality as a result of homeschooling, it's going to be largely irrelevant to the primary areas of concern in the debate.
#113 Mar 12 2008 at 8:50 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Smasharoo wrote:

Yes. And McCarthy had a "list" of confirmed communist spies in his hand...


Still waiting Smash.


Ok? You could go on Google Scholar and look it up instead of waiting and just link it yourself if you're so fascinated. I suppose anyone could.



Still haven't found one showing that homeschooled kids do worse then public school kids, have you?

It's ok Smash. We all know you're wrong on this one. I know it's hard for you to imagine that a monolithic government run enterprise could possibly produce poorer results then private citizens acting on their own, and that this drives your reluctance to admit what we all know is the truth of the matter. I also understand that the data on this subject represents an "inconvenient truth" with regard to one of your own personal sacred cows, so you'd rather ignore or deny then accept the truth.


Whatever. I've proven my point. Maybe tomorrow we can get back on the track of discussing how the states position in this represents a clear violation of the people's rights. Maybe...
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#114 Mar 12 2008 at 8:55 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Kachi wrote:
Whatever studies you find are only going to show a very narrow advantage or disadvantage of home schooling. Unless you can find a study that takes a comprehensive look at success in the workplace, emotional stability, and social adaptability/morality as a result of homeschooling, it's going to be largely irrelevant to the primary areas of concern in the debate.



I disagree. The case against homeschooling (and for the draconian requirements designed to make it financially impossible for most parents) is that homeschooling amounts to some form of "abuse" of the children since they wont receive the same quality of education as they'd get in a public school (the presumed alternative in most cases).

In order to support that argument, you'd have to show three things:

1. That homeschooled kids were not receiving the same quality eduction as public school kids.

2. That the state has some need to ensure that they do.

3. That this need outweighs the inherent rights of parents to raise their own children.

Failure at any of these three points represents a failure of the case against homeschooling.

So far, we only got as far as point number one before finding a failure. I don't have to prove or disprove either of the others, but I'm quite sure that point three is another failure for the states case here as well...
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#115 Mar 12 2008 at 9:15 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
4,593 posts
gbaji wrote:
And Here is an example of "empirical data".


Nation wide ACT Scores:

Average general ed high school program: 19.6

Average homeschooled: 22.5


I could list off 10 years of ACT score and show that homeschooled kids did better then the average public school students every single year.


Your turn.

Edited, Mar 12th 2008 8:03pm by gbaji


The problem with those numbers is such: The only homeschooled children who are taking those tests are the ones who do well enough to make it to that point. The ones who are taking those tests are the ones who's parents are actually teaching them well. The kids who aren't being taught well just aren't taking the tests. The public numbers are from manditory tests, the homeschool numbers are from kids whose parents cared enough to make them take the test (or did the test for them/helped them do the test from home).
#116 Mar 12 2008 at 9:32 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

Still haven't found one showing that homeschooled kids do worse then public school kids, have you?


Yup.

Dozens, actually. I'm shocked you're really this poor at research. When I say shocked, I mean not surprised at all.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#117 Mar 12 2008 at 10:16 PM Rating: Decent
I'm pretty interested to see your dozens of sources home schoolers doing worse as well.

Either way I'm sure you'll say your sources are credible while Gbaji's are biased.

The argument can never end. You're both right in your own respects. Anything pointing towards home schooling would be a "home-schooling advocate" while anything to the contrary would be "anti home-schooling advocates".

I will have to admit I'm having trouble finding any credible anti home-schooling advocate sources other than posters saying:

"I bet they have no friends, lulz."
#118 Mar 12 2008 at 10:21 PM Rating: Excellent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

I will have to admit I'm having trouble finding any credible anti home-schooling advocate sources other than posters saying:


That makes you bad at research.



The argument can never end.


That makes you bad at reason.


You're both right in your own respects.


That makes you functionally retarded.

If you're the product of the public school system, maybe Gbaji has a point.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#119 Mar 12 2008 at 10:26 PM Rating: Decent
Smasharoo wrote:

If you're the product of the public school system, maybe Gbaji has a point.



I'm glad I could be the one to make you reach middle ground.
#120 Mar 13 2008 at 5:08 AM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
gbaji wrote:
And Here is an example of "empirical data".


Nation wide ACT Scores:

Average general ed high school program: 19.6

Average homeschooled: 22.5


I could list off 10 years of ACT score and show that homeschooled kids did better then the average public school students every single year.


Your turn.
Do you have any data sources on the numbers of homeschooled kids that get a GED, verus a HS diploma, and how many actually take the ACT or SAT?

____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#121 Mar 13 2008 at 8:51 AM Rating: Good
***
3,829 posts
As much as it pains me to actually force my fingers to type these words, Gbaji is right on this one. Smash, you're pretty much all hat and no cattle here. Frankly, this sort of premenstrual-esque hysterical and groundless ranting is more appropriate for another poster around these parts. Are we sure the part of Smash isn't being played by Shadowrelm at the moment?
#122 Mar 13 2008 at 8:56 AM Rating: Excellent
Nexa
*****
12,065 posts
Ambrya wrote:
As much as it pains me to actually force my fingers to type these words, Gbaji is right on this one. Smash, you're pretty much all hat and no cattle here. Frankly, this sort of premenstrual-esque hysterical and groundless ranting is more appropriate for another poster around these parts. Are we sure the part of Smash isn't being played by Shadowrelm at the moment?


Even if Smash is being an ***, that doesn't make it ok to say that Gbaji is right, even if you agree with him. That's just crazy talk.

Nexa
____________________________
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.”
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
#123 Mar 13 2008 at 9:16 AM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Ambrya wrote:
As much as it pains me to actually force my fingers to type these words, Gbaji is right on this one. Smash, you're pretty much all hat and no cattle here. Frankly, this sort of premenstrual-esque hysterical and groundless ranting is more appropriate for another poster around these parts. Are we sure the part of Smash isn't being played by Shadowrelm at the moment?
There's no hard evidence to support either claim that home-schooling is or isn't 'over-all' better, academicaly than public schooling.

What gjabi presented isn't evidence...not in the least.

The point that I thought Smash was originally trying to make was not necessarily that home-schooling better prepares you take take a college placement exam or not, but simply that it is a narrow-minded approach to education and presents one more avenue for the rich to widen the gap with the poor masses stuck in public schools. Ambrya your post presented evidence to that beautifully with the whole "my kid is too good to go to school with the masses" mentality.

Personally I don't see home-schooling in the same light as private education unless it's done for the 'Ambrya' reasons. Most often childern are home-schooled for religious reasons. And while that may be creepy I don't see it as an economic class stratification issue.

____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#124 Mar 13 2008 at 9:19 AM Rating: Excellent
Nexa
*****
12,065 posts
While it's shrunk slightly in recent years, the majority of homeschool educators still site "religious reasons" as a primary cause for keeping their kids home. The number of home school educators who have only a high school diploma is also on the rise (I'm not saying that these are related, just interesting points).

Nexa
____________________________
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.”
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
#125 Mar 13 2008 at 9:56 AM Rating: Good
Ambrya wrote:
Frankly, this sort of premenstrual-esque hysterical and groundless ranting is more appropriate for another poster around these parts


It was by far the most entertaining post of this thread. I admit it's not pleasant to be on the reciving end of it, but at least it's amusing. Gbaji is wrong most of the time and his posts are boring as fUck.
____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#126 Mar 13 2008 at 10:03 AM Rating: Good
***
3,829 posts
Nexa wrote:

Even if Smash is being an ***, that doesn't make it ok to say that Gbaji is right, even if you agree with him. That's just crazy talk.

Nexa


When I said Gbaji was right, I meant about his assertion that Smash has nothing to back up his claims. Smash doesn't. This whole "I'm looking at it but I'm not gonna link it for you" sh'it is weak. And the rest of Smash's posts on the subject are just making me want to offer him a tampon and some Midol, regardless of whether or not he has a valid point to make (which I have yet to see, anyway.)


Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 378 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (378)