Couple has ten children, all home schooled

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
Mar 17, 2009
15,949
4,075
328
#1
Aaaaaand they all read by the age of 4, write and do math by the age of six, and six of the ten went to college at the age of twelve. The Harding children who have graduated from college are : a Navy doctor, a mechanical engineer, a musician, an architect, and a computer scientist.

It's statistically impossible for all ten children to be exceptionally intelligent. That leaves one other explanation: public education is so broken, that a couple with no apparent formal training (one of them is named Kip) is able to raise ten children (I doubt the adult to students ratio is much higher in the public education system either once we add in all the MikefromBXs into the equation - and these people also earn a living, while doing this) has managed to succeed at a task public education generally fails at, and it took them about half the time.

Maybe it has something to do with not treating children as a statistic or a herd animal, while trying to educate them.
Homeschooling Family Shows that Children can Learn More and Faster

Posted by Robert Begley at 12:51 pm ET


The well-documented abysmal failure of government schools has prompted a homeschooling boom, as many parents have chosen to retain or regain control of their children’s education instead of leaving it in the hands of the state.

One inspiring example comes by way of the Harding family. The parents, Kip and Mona Lisa, have ten children, and they have applied an education program that dramatically accelerates their children’s learning. Education in the Harding household begins with mastery of the “three Rs” (reading, writing, and arithmetic) and then moves on to independent study. And all of it proceeds in the context of a supportive family culture. The results? The six oldest Harding children reached college by age 12, and the four youngest are on track to follow suit.

By the time a Harding child is 4 years old, Kip and Mona Lisa have taught him to identify and trace letters, to sound out English phonemes (distinct units of sound in the language), and to read what they call “easy books.” By age 6, the child has learned to subtract, to multiply, to write simple sentences, and to read more-advanced books.

The Hardings look to the child’s personal interests to provide motivation for studying each subject. For example, if the child loves music, as one of the Harding children does, his parents give him reading materials, writing assignments, and mathematical problems that relate to this interest. Mona Lisa explains, “We find out what [our children’s] passions are, what they really like to study, and we accelerate them gradually.” The goal is to make learning enjoyable and fruitful. Kip explains, “The expectation is that you’re going to have a fun day.”

The Harding children who have graduated from college are enjoying careers as: a Navy doctor, a mechanical engineer, a musician, an architect, and a computer scientist.

Although the Hardings incorporate Christian doctrine in their children’s education (a substantial flaw in their approach), for the most part they aim to help their children achieve mastery of the three Rs and other subjects, and to love learning.

It is debatable whether sending a child to college at age twelve is in his best interest. But the Hardings’ program demonstrates that children have potential to learn much more and much faster than educators typically realize. Other parents and educators would do well to take note.
http://www.theobjectivestandard.com...hows-that-children-can-learn-more-and-faster/
Maybe it's time to stop buying into the myth that public education is the key to a prosperous, educated country. The evidence that public education is what ruins American children's education is overwhelming.
 

blazin

Registered User
Dec 9, 2004
3,931
435
578
#3
I plan on sending my kids to public school for the social aspect, but will heavily supplement their edumacations at home according to what I think is most important - math, science, and of course welding.
 

Pigdango

Silence, you mortal Fuck!
Donator
Jun 22, 2004
77,193
49,677
788
#4
Maybe it's time to stop buying into the myth that public education is the key to a prosperous, educated country. The evidence that public education is what ruins American children's education is overwhelming.
You're right, public education as an entitlement is an inherently flawed system. Those children whose parents believe that education should only take place from 7am - 3pm 180 days of the year starting at age 5 are destined to fail.

That's a bit of a loaded deck you're playing with, though. The common factor between homeschooled kids and public school kids that exceed is parents who are actively involved in their child's education. I would say that the percentage of homeschooled kids whose parents are involved in their education is a smidge higher, wouldn't you?
 

Mikefrombx

Registered User
Jan 13, 2011
953
59
153
Bronx
#5
If you have involved parents children are more than 80 percent likely to succeed and go to college. The parents who plop the kid in front of a television when they are not in school are the fucking problem.

The countries with successful public school systems are also the ones who promote family involvement in schooling.

And as a big f you to the op, by the time the kids get to me they are already lost.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
 

Hudson

Supreme Champion!!!!!
Donator
Jan 14, 2002
32,840
4,566
898
Land of misfit toys
#6
A lot of my friends in Montana home school their kids because the schools just blow. The kids go to the regular High School for the socialization but they are earning college credits for most of their classes. One family has 7 kids and all of them are accomplished pianists.. I gave them my college Latin books because one of the kids wanted to study Latin..he was 12 and was reading Ceasar's Gallic Wars in Latin by the time he was 14.
 

BIV

I'm Biv Dick Black, the Over Poster.
Apr 22, 2002
79,207
27,694
898
Seattle
#7
If you have involved parents children are more than 80 percent likely to succeed and go to college. The parents who plop the kid in front of a television when they are not in school are the fucking problem.

The countries with successful public school systems are also the ones who promote family involvement in schooling.

And as a big f you to the op, by the time the kids get to me they are already lost.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
This. There is no excuse for your kid to not already be reading by the time they get to kindergarten.

The best education system in the world wont work if parents are not doing their part.
 

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
Mar 17, 2009
15,949
4,075
328
#8
You're right, public education as an entitlement is an inherently flawed system. Those children whose parents believe that education should only take place from 7am - 3pm 180 days of the year starting at age 5 are destined to fail.
The list of things wrong with public education is endless. The fact that it's centrally planned, and handed out as an entitlement, is the cause of all those problems, sure. But it doesn't just cause the one problem of making some parents not get involved. That just one of many, many problems, and most of them have to do with what happens in the schools, not at home.
That's a bit of a loaded deck you're playing with, though.
The article is not making a comparison between these 10 kids and highschool dropouts. It's making a comparison between these kids and kids who go to public school and are ready to enter a good college when they're 18. That's what these people were able to do: teach their kids everything children who do end up succeeding despite going through public school learn. The big difference being, they did it SIX YEARS faster.

That's how massively you handicap your kid by putting them through public school. Again: I'm talking about kids who do end up successfully navigating through the shitpool that is public education (with the help of their parents, obviously, normal kids can't do it by themselves), and go on to college.
The common factor between homeschooled kids and public school kids that exceed is parents who are actively involved in their child's education.
Sending your kid to public school for 7 hours a day, every day, into a shitty classroom with shitty teachers, and a shitty curriculum that makes even the few good teachers unable to perform well, is a massive handicap. It's a massive handicap whether you work with them at home or not. Everything you do at home will be challenged at school, and will probably even get your kid in trouble and frustrated for not conforming to the rigid rules and curriculum he needs to conform to to get good grades.

It's such a massive handicap, that this couple (who aren't rocket scientists) was able to come up with a plan, all by themselves, that got their kids to learn everything an 18 yo. kid who's about to go to a good college learns, SIX years early. That's roughly half the time, and with kids who are six years younger.
 
Last edited:

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
Mar 17, 2009
15,949
4,075
328
#9
If you have involved parents children are more than 80 percent likely to succeed and go to college. The parents who plop the kid in front of a television when they are not in school are the fucking problem.

The countries with successful public school systems are also the ones who promote family involvement in schooling.
They don't "promote" family involvement (that's retarded, as is every government program that ever attempts to promote certain behavior in people), they ALLOW family involvement a little more. They allow it by giving teachers and individual schools a little more freedom to shape the curriculum to the needs of the kids who go there, and parents and kids the freedom to choose their own schools based on their interests. That's the main difference.

That's why they are slightly more successful than the US public system. But calling even them successful, compared to what this family has done, is still dishonest.

The real question I have for you, however, is this: Do you think it's fair that this couple, who are working hard to earn a living, and are also doing a stellar job homeschooling all their children (and in fact already turned five of them into doctors, scientists and engineers), is also getting robbed to pay your salary? Do you think it's fair that these two people are forced to contribute money to public education?
And as a big f you to the op, by the time the kids get to me they are already lost.
As a fuck you to me, you're admitting that you are useless? That all you do is shepherd around kids you already consider "lost"? You're right, that is a fuck you to me. Fuck me for being forced to pay you for that.
 
Last edited:

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
Apr 27, 2005
40,284
7,454
438
The Inland Empire State
#10
My kid went to public school, graduated at the top of her class, and just graduated magna cum laude in four years from college; all while working about 20-30 hours a week and doing three internships. It's possible if you've got involved parents.
 

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
Mar 17, 2009
15,949
4,075
328
#11
This. There is no excuse for your kid to not already be reading by the time they get to kindergarten.

The best education system in the world wont work if parents are not doing their part.
What do you consider a parent's "part"? Isn't a parent's "part" in fact their children's entire education?

For a lot of people, it would be impossible to do what this couple has done, and take charge of their children's education, because they're being forced to pay into the public system anyway, and they can't afford to pay twice.
 

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
Mar 17, 2009
15,949
4,075
328
#12
My kid went to public school, graduated at the top of her class, and just graduated magna cum laude in four years from college; all while working about 20-30 hours a week and doing three internships. It's possible if you've got involved parents.
Of course it's possible. Just not very likely. And your daughter is probably smarter than these kids are, too, if she graduated top of her class. At least, statistically speaking, she's bound to be smarter than most of them. Still took her six years longer to learn enough to be ready for college.
 

steve500

Registered User
Oct 20, 2008
4,520
2,099
368
35,000 ft
#13
Exactly. I get pissed off when the families who think of grade school as nothing more than free babysitting try to blame "the system" for intentionally making certain schools better than others.
 

BIV

I'm Biv Dick Black, the Over Poster.
Apr 22, 2002
79,207
27,694
898
Seattle
#14
What do you consider a parent's "part"? Isn't a parent's "part" in fact their children's entire education?
It's just not realistic for most families to homeschool and private education is out of reach most Americans as well, I don't care what you do with taxes.

Public education has failed due to lack of parental involvement, period. Parents being involved means taking the time after work/school to help get homework done/study, getting involved with teachers, attending school board meetings and holding members accountable.

Public schools have fallen into disarray thanks to three generations of parents not giving a shit.

Well, that and minorities.
 

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
Mar 17, 2009
15,949
4,075
328
#15
Public education has failed due to lack of parental involvement, period.
Nonsense. If that's the only thing that mattered, then public education would never fail kids who's parents do get involved. But in fact it does. Kids who's parents work hard to educate their children still face the same obstacles all the other kids face at school.

They still have to spend thousands of hours sitting in classrooms with teachers who don't give a shit, droning on about a curriculum put together by people who didn't give a shit, containing mostly information no one gives a shit about.

The fact that their parents are there to fix the damage doesn't mean public education succeeded. Without public education, those kids would be doing much, much better.
It's just not realistic for most families to homeschool and private education is out of reach most Americans as well, I don't care what you do with taxes.
Private education is more expensive than it needs to be because of subsidies and regulations, and you're ignoring the fact that, before the current system was put in place, charity played a massive role in the education of poor children. In fact, that system resulted in higher overall literacy levels than we have today.

So it's not unrealistic at all. It's been done, and it's been done well, when the country was much poorer than it is today. Americans just don't know their history, thanks to, again, public education. It would be odd for the public education system to teach children that before public education, literacy levels were higher, wouldn't it?
 

BIV

I'm Biv Dick Black, the Over Poster.
Apr 22, 2002
79,207
27,694
898
Seattle
#16
Nonsense. If that's the only thing that mattered, then public education would never fail kids who's parents do get involved. But in fact it does. Kids who's parents work hard to educate their children still face the same obstacles all the other kids face at school.

They still have to spend thousands of hours sitting in classrooms with teachers who don't give a shit, droning on about a curriculum put together by people who didn't give a shit, containing mostly information no one gives a shit about.

The fact that their parents are there to fix the damage doesn't mean public education succeeded. Without public education, those kids would be doing much, much better.

Private education is more expensive than it needs to be because of subsidies and regulations, and you're ignoring the fact that, before the current system was put in place, charity played a massive role in the education of poor children. In fact, that system resulted in higher overall literacy levels than we have today.

So it's not unrealistic at all. It's been done, and it's been done well, when the country was much poorer than it is today. Americans just don't know their history, thanks to, again, public education. It would be odd for the public education system to teach children that before public education, literacy levels were higher, wouldn't it?
Not a chance it would work today. The population is far to large for private schools and charity to take care of it all. Especially when most households have both parents working.

Yes, the schools are shit. But the schools are shit because of parents. One parent struggling against a teacher isn't going to do shit. You need to get most, if not all of them involved. You need to have your kids reading BEFORE they get to school.

Hell, you need to get rid of school boards and hire deans accountable to the vote of the parents of students, not the community as a whole.
 

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
Mar 17, 2009
15,949
4,075
328
#17
Well, that and minorities.
Not all minorities. Asians are doing great, so are Jews. Various kinds of towelheads are also getting by. Upper and middle class blacks and hispanics, again: doing fine.

It's odd that the people doing worst, and benefiting the least from this wonderful public education system are the exact type of people you just finished arguing would be left out and fucked over by a free education system: the children of poor people.
 

BIV

I'm Biv Dick Black, the Over Poster.
Apr 22, 2002
79,207
27,694
898
Seattle
#19
You really don't see the flaw in that argument?
No, there's not. The population as a whole will not fund education out of the goodness of their hearts. It's one of the few places our tax dollars should actually be going.

The trick is government funding and mandated minimal standards without government control.
 

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
Mar 17, 2009
15,949
4,075
328
#22
Then why don't you explain it to me?
Because you don't seem interested in my explanations. You just decided that free education is impossible, based on nothing.
 

BIV

I'm Biv Dick Black, the Over Poster.
Apr 22, 2002
79,207
27,694
898
Seattle
#23
Because you don't seem interested in a logical argument, and that's all I got.
Oh, go fuck yourself.

Here is the argument. We have the responsibility to make sure every kid in the country has the opportunity to get an education. That education has to be paid for. The only way to pay for it is through taxes. The tiny minority that could afford private education and charity funds that have been decreasing rapidly every year are not going to cut it.

That means the only way to get out kids education is a functioning public school system. The system is broken. We need to fix it, not scrap it. That starts with parents.
 

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
Mar 17, 2009
15,949
4,075
328
#24
Oh, go fuck yourself.

Here is the argument. We have the responsibility to make sure every kid in the country has the opportunity to get an education. That education has to be paid for. The only way to pay for it is through taxes. The tiny minority that could afford private education and charity funds that have been decreasing rapidly every year are not going to cut it.

That means the only way to get out kids education is a functioning public school system. The system is broken. We need to fix it, not scrap it. That starts with parents.
Saying the same thing over and over again, without backing it up with facts, is not an argument.
 

BIV

I'm Biv Dick Black, the Over Poster.
Apr 22, 2002
79,207
27,694
898
Seattle
#25
Saying the same thing over and over again, without backing it up with facts, is not an argument.
Those are the facts. Tell me one thing I said that is wrong? How would you come up with the money, bake sales?