<p>Also, I know an absolutely brilliant girl who graduated a few years ago from my school; I can't describe her because that might identify me, but she could definitely give Chelsea a run for her money in IQ and passion and intelligence and college acceptances...and whatever. And she went to public school and never had all of these expensive tutors, harp lessons, etc, but I would say ended up with more impressive accomplishments.</p>
<p>Also, it seems that Chelsea's parents cared way too much about whether or not she got into college. The girl that I am talking about basically had to do it all on her own.</p>
<p>We don't know if it was the $$s, genetics, homeschooling etc. This family made a choice for their daughter. They are not "selling" homeschooling or pushing it on anyone else. They had great results, and apparently, a heck of a lot of fun along the way. Why do people feel compelled to offer "alternative solutions"? In this case, it worked out "just fine". Thank goodness, they had the freedom to make this choice, unlike many other places, where people like some of those who have posted here, would make the determination of how and where to educate their daughter for them.</p>
<p>Alison Miller, a previous IMO gold medalist, was homeschooled. She does not seem to have missed the "invaluable high school experience." </p>
<p>And here is the wikipedia entry for Reid Barton:</p>
<p>
[quote]
Barton is the son of two environmental engineers. His abilities were evident from an early age, being tutored in game theory by a computer science graduate student in grade three, and obtaining the maximum score of 5 on the AP Calculus examination while 10 years old. Officially homeschooled since third grade, Barton took part time classes at Tufts University, in chemistry (5th grade), physics (6th grade), and subsequently Swedish, Finnish, French, and Chinese. Working part-time with MIT computer scientist Charles E. Leiserson since eighth grade, he honed his abilities on CilkChess, one of the top computer chess programs at the time.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I also think it's funny to push for private school, considering that Exeter costs nearly as much as HYPSM before finaid. I would find hard to believe that Chelsea's family spent that much each year on her schooling, harp lessons, foreign travels and all.</p>
<p>I am sure there are many more amazing people out there. Chelsea did not receive the title of "Most Impressive Teen Ever", this is not a competition. It was merely an article in a local newspaper about one teen's success and her somewhat unusual background.
Jeez- is every profile on a teen's accomplishment be it unique service project, athletic achievement, number of Girl Scout cookies sold etc. going to result in people coming up with the person that they know that is sooooo much more impressive in that arena?</p>
<p>Homeschooling works well, of course, if your child is brilliant. But many parents like to think that they have a brilliant child and then pull them out of regular school, and they dont do as well as if they were in public school</p>
<p>"But many parents like to think that they have a brilliant child and then pull them out of regular school, and they dont do as well as if they were in public school"
And your evidence to back up this statement comes from where?</p>
<p>Narcissa - I think you misunderstood. Prep schools like Philip Exter, Andover,... Davidson Institute are wonderful for gifted students. However, some young and profoundly gifted kids may not fit there when they have to be far away from home. Gifted kids need a lot of emotional support.</p>
<p>Okay, at least you've conceded that homeschooling works well for brilliant kids. that's a step up from dissing homeschooling altogether. You will note that Reid Barton, homeschooler, took classes at Tufts and worked part-time with an MIT scientist. Unless you consider Tufts and MIT to be subpar, he must have got a better education there than in his local high school (decent, but not a reason to move into that town). And would he have had the opportunity to learn so many languages?</p>
<p>Post 75:
Yes, well "home"school is the generic term for a non-site school, often, but with sometimes little of the learning occurring "in the home," as well as an understanding that families arrange much of it & that it approaches Independent Study as the learner matures. The original term has stuck because of brevity.</p>
<p>Post 74:
"I was under the impression, though, that most of these programs are designed for students who, for one reason or another, cannot attend school. In other words, they are not designed to address the needs of the gifted."
The ones I'm referring to are designed for anyone opting out of site public schooling but wanting public funds for an alternative delivery system. Most of the time physical or practical issues are not the driving force -- rather, the format & priorities of the public schools, which have found to be wanting. Secondarily, they serve the needs of families with interest in more individual attention for an underperforming student or a disengaged student. Thirdly, they serve the needs of families with LD kids who have not been accommodated in the classroom but who have shown to respond well to an alternative site, as well as gifted students. (Understand that there are students who are both LD & gifted, since as you know LD is not associated with IQ per se. In those cases, homeschooling can be particularly helpful.) </p>
<p>Not many homeschoolers that I know "cannot attend school." In a few cases I've seen it used very temporarily -- & very unsuccessfully -- by those with a child who has been hospitalized, expelled, etc.</p>
<hr>
<p>And just to reiterate what has been obliquely stated, homeschooling is actually quite inconvenient. It may sound glamorous (& the article makes it sound that way), but it is a lot of work for both the schoolers & the schooled. In addition to Chauffeuring Fatigue, the planning, organization, networking, tracking, record-keeping, battling state authorities -- not to mention simple labor -- is not for the faint of heart, but particularly for those who have made a life-long commitment to it. Unless you, the parent, are hiring out the process (and some do), be prepared to give up much of your own life & career. The most frequent reason people drop out of homeschooling is the labor factor. It's a lot bigger than people realize. The second biggest reason is simply not being prepared to take on the task of learners who sometimes require more expert (& less emotionally involved) intervention (in those cases where they do).</p>
<p>
[quote]
Gifted kids need a lot of emotional support.
[/quote]
If you have a child that you know would need a lot of emotional support, I would say that homeschooling is the only way. However perhaps some children do need emotional support, but by your definition of gifted (which seems to be set at 145+ IQ), there are many (actually, most) people in that range who can do just as well socially and intellectually in a regular classroom, have great friends, gossip about whatever regular people talk about, etc. I've never actually taken a Mensa-approved IQ test, but I've taken countless ones at school (I wonder if they are accurate). Last time I took one was in 7th grade and I scored around 149 or something; I don't feel "gifted" or "smart" or in need of emotional support :| <em>ponders</em> perhaps I do and just dont know it.........lol</p>
<p>Actually, perhaps I am wrong in looking at a regular high school environment as similar to my school's...my school is very conducive to intelligence and most of us, even the snobby/materialistic people look up to (or at least dont make fun of) their smart, high-achieving classmates. If schools are anything like in the movie Mean Girls then...nvm!</p>
<p>Re post 91, I was trying to be as broad as possible in my understanding of "cannot attend school." I did not mean to suggest that students cannot attend only if they are disabled or expelled. LD&gifted could attend school, but, as you say, often it is far better for them to be homeschooled.</p>
<p>I'll give people 2 very logical reasons for such "school choice." One is by parents appalled by the decadence in the American culture, evident even on the elem. level (some of them are various religions, some not, & don't be so sure you know which religions, btw; many of the most recent homeschoolers are Middle Eastern Muslims recently immigrated: the materalism & sexualized atmosphere in schools is opposed to their value system.</p>
<p>A second logical choice is a reaction to dominant immigrant populations in the public schools, where that exists. When the teacher is teaching to a 99% ELL class -- & going therefore at 1/4 the pace, or worse, you're learning zero if you're the 1%.</p>
<p>In the above situations, homeschooling with public funds is sometimes the most logical choice.</p>
<p>
[quote]
When the teacher is teaching to a 99% ELL class -- & going therefore at 1/4 the pace, or worse, you're learning zero if you're the 1%.
[/quote]
I am lucky to live in a very educationally-concerned district :) if anything affected the quality of education in my town (or worse: students' grades! gasp!) you will be sure to hear endless phone calls and even more threats to sue ... well, someone.</p>
<p>Narcissa:
Kindly show us the basis for your assertion that most USAMO winners are homeschooled... In a brief search of the past three years on the USAMO website, I found the following on MOSP qualifiers (roughly the top three dozen math students in the country):
2007 -- 3 homeschooled students, none who went to IMO
2006 -- 2 homeschooled students, none who went to IMO
2005 -- one homeschooled student, none who went to IMO</p>
<p>This assumes that students who listed their school affiliation as an area math circle or EPGY are homeschooled. The vast majority of the students who make MOSP are attending public specialized high schools or private schools where there is at least a hope of getting appropriate math courses (or of having teachers who "get" them and may work with students individually). Many of them also study with a mentor or take classes at a local university.</p>
<p>Homeschooling comes in many flavors. At our house, it takes the form of after-schooling. My S has been doing it in his particular areas of interest for many years, in addition to the four years of college-level math he was able to take at his HS. It costs me a few college textbooks and maintaining a functional computer at home. The bus ride to the local university is free with his student ID. The mentor is free. The online CS curriculum is free. Curiosity and passion are free. Seeing my S explode with discovery...priceless.</p>
<p>We know others who have pulled their children from schools (public and private) after being faced with untenable situations -- toxic teachers, hostile administrators, a school's unwilllingness to accommodate a gifted/LD student. As others have mentioned, homeschooling is not a simple task. It's a labor of love. The home schooling kids we know have better social lives than many of the over-scheduled highschoolers we know.</p>
<p>What an interesting thread this has turned out to be. I had no idea that the term “homeschooling” was so broadly defined. Based on the definition Epiphany provided, turns out my son has been partially homeschooled, too: independent study in several areas as well as several post-BC Calc courses taught by a prof at a local LAC. Along the way, all of it has been facilitated/supported by son’s schools.</p>
<p>My son did not take BC Calc or learn game theory at 10. We have, however, found it essential to advocate for his educational needs since early elementary school. We have never used the “G” word. It just would not have been well-received. Too many parents in our affluent community have their kids tested by some entity or other and scream from the rooftops about how “gifted” little Suzy or Johnny is. That is why, and perhaps it’s a function of the part of the country and the area we live in, I view the term “gifted” as loaded -- a fighting word. PLEASE DO NOT JUMP ALL OVER ME, MPM: I understand from this thread that the term has a distinct meaning. I have never met a student like some that marite and others have described. I believe they’re out there: I just haven’t encountered one. And the fact is, although Chelsea is clearly a truly outstanding young woman, from a single article in the Chicago Tribune, we don’t know enough about her to judge the degree of her “giftedness.” </p>
<p>With various additions/accomodations, my son has thrived in a conventional school system. He’s an extremely social kid who I think would not have been happy without the conventional peer group and social structure that a standard school provides. But he also is not on the furthest reaches of the "gifted" spectrum.</p>
<p>I have always hated the term "gifted" ever since first encountering it when my D1 was in kindergarten. Having a child who does exceptionally well academically is certainly a wonderful and serious challenge. But terms like "gifted" make the whole road much more difficult, imo. They imply effortlessness, blessings by an all powerful god, magic. Words are indeed powerful and the word "gifted" really needs to be expunged from American education. </p>
<p>My husband and I always told our kids - both of whom have tested quite easily into whatever advanced curriculum was available - that they are NOT gifted or particularly brilliant, they are just lucky in that they love to learn. We have also told them that they need to make sure they hold on tight to that "gift." We really believe this in our hearts. Some kids enjoy learning new things the way others love to toss a ball or bang on a drum. Some are simply more interested, not necessarily wired differently to acquire knowledge more easily.</p>
<p>As for the harp-playing home schooled girl with the Ivy sweep of admissions. She sounds interesting and certainly intelligent. Also, not averse to publicity as some students with equally stellar achievements. FWIW, when we toured HYPS, Caltech and U Chicago earlier this month with our admitted daughter, we encountered at each of these schools clusters of high school seniors in the same situation -- admitted virtually everywhere they applied. This was hard to find out about them, most were extremely reluctant to tell you but when tour guides polled the group as to what grade they were in high school, the truth would emerge. Why else would high school seniors be touring Harvard in April?</p>
<p>There is most certainly a cohort of applicants who scored perfectly across all the standardized tests and managed to distinguish themselves in other ways as well. Some are home schooled, some private schooled, some magnet public, and some truly impressive kids from lousy low-income publics (those are the ones I'd really be interested in reading about!) They have been at the interview weekends for the big merit scholarships this spring and they have been taking a look at the elite schools that have admitted them. And the ones we met were very matter-of-fact, very modest about this momentary spot of triumph in their lives. They struck me as keenly aware that their futures lay ahead of them along with challenges far more daunting than the SAT, ACT or ECs that made their applications interesting.</p>
<p>Why would the home schooled harp-playing girl's parents encourage this sort of publicity? I honestly wouldn't want to be in their daughter's shoes going into Harvard or Yale this fall, with so much scrutiny, so many expectations, so much attention. But everyone is different . . .</p>