On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:30:38 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"Gunner" wrote in message
.. .

"People disagree over homeschooling's social and academic benefits.
Test score data from states requiring testing or from homeschooling
associations, while not totally representative, suggest that tested
homeschooled children are above average (Lines 2001). According to two
Time reporters (Cloud and Morse 2001), "the average SAT score for home
schoolers in 2000 was 1100, compared with 1019 for the general
population."

Kids from disfunctional families and illiterate, impoverished families are
included in the "general population." Home-schooled kids almost exclusively
are not.

Yes, but how does that fact prove that home schooling is
detrimental to children?

Another case of lying with statistics.

I don't know of any laws against "disfunctional families and
illiterate, impoverished families" home schooling. They
don't, but that's because of the combination of not wanting
to and not being able to. If you dropped the "disfunctional
families and illiterate, impoverished families" from the
comparison, the results would probably be about equal
between the home schooled and publicly schooled children.
No one knows and no one can know, because the computation
can't be done.

The usual slam against home schoolers is that THEY are the
disfunctional, illiterate families and that home schooling
somehow damages their children. All the stats show is that
home schooling doesn't damage their children - at least not
academically. The only apparent damage done is to the
financial health and political power of public education.
THAT is what fires up the school boards and teachers' unions
- not the welfare of the children. (My opinion, of course.)

--
Robert Sturgeon,
proud member of the vast right wing conspiracy
and the evil gun culture.