Forget about whether she's "learning enough;" she's not, since she should be learning only 2 things:
2) How to make as much money as possible, which the school CAN'T teach; this is what colleges are for-- and they award degrees to prove it.
Huh? C'mon Brian, that is pretty shallow, not to mention inaccurate. What percentage of 18 year olds even know what they want to do with their lives? Why would some one want to " make as much money as possible"?
So that they can be good little americans and buy stuff they don't need? Then build a bigger house and rent storage space for all their sh*t? That outlook is kinda disgusting to me. And is in direct opposition to reason number 1 that you listed. I doubt I am alone in my feeling...
No, so they can be good Americans and have FREEDOM-- while respecting that of others. Freedom to live where they want, have what they want, and to DO what they want.
Nothing lets you do that like
money.Also, the system pays according to supply and demand, and so if you make more, you CONTRIBUTE more-- according to the CUSTOMER'S definition of "contribution," rather than that of some self-appointed ruler.
Finally, because of the prinicple of specialization, you're most likely to earn the most, by doing what you're best at-- which serves the twofold purpose of being your most engaging profession (since it makes maximum use of your abilities), as well as being the most lucrative; as such, you'll be doubly happy doing it (since it's a lot easier to love your work, when it PAYS a lot!). The person might have to find their own compromise between money and satisifaction, but if you're in the profession that makes the greatest amount possible, then this probably won't be problem since you'll be fully actualized, and the only problem will be that you'll be so fulfilled that you'll find yourself doing it TOO much.
(This isn't really a problem, however, since it will take things that you personally consider to be REALLY worthwhile to take you away from it, since your work-time will be worth more to you and others; this makes for a more "meaningful" life overall).
My goal for my unschooled child is that he be happy and prepared for life. Certainly earning a viable income is a necessity but not one of only two things a person needs to know. Your posts come across as bitter, yet young. That is unfortunate, and I hope I am misinterpreting the lines.
You are. If you're TRULY "unschooling" your child, then you'll do it to fulfill THEIR inidviduality, rather than simply supplanting the school's objectives and purposes with your own (which is, sadly, a tendency among many parents. I'm not saying that you ARE doing this, but simply that child-actualization and education, developing
their unique abilities and interests-- rather than indoctrination and training of CHOSEN ones, i.e. letting them be THEMSELVES rather than some "mainstream standard," simply IS the
definition of "unschooling.")
My points might sound trivial, but a lot of thought and research
did go into them-- fortunately, freedom and capitalism go hand-in-hand. To begin with, I trust the consumer-market to determine its own priorities, and I respect consumers enough to make their own decisions rather than foisting my own upon them. Thus, if they have a demand for something, then they have the right to pay what they want for it.
Second, recent neuro-assessment science corroborates my holdings, that intelligence and intellectual ability is not a linear thing that varies in amount (i.e. one's IQ measure's one's ability), but quite INDIVIDUAL; as such, a person will tend to be most fulfilled by activities which engage their special talents, which are also likely to be most in demand due to specialization. By fulfilling this demand, the person will be likely to earn the most money at it-- in addition to
being most fulfilled. It's a double-win proposition.
Unfortunately, the current educational-system tries to pigeonhole people's ability as a linear quantification rather than an equal
qualification; likewise, regulations also do this in order to interfere with the free market. However, there are ways around this by incorporating one's abilities dyncamically via free enterprise.
Life is not a big competition to everyone, and success does not equal money.
Again, this goes back to supply and demand-- which IS competitive; if you earn more, you're CONTRIBUTING more according to subjective definitions of demand. Therefore, since I respect people's right to make their own decisions about what they want, then you ARE more successful in contributing to others and society, by
earning more.
Too many people chase failed dreams that were inspired externally; maybe they saw a ballet or basketball game or science show that was popular, and decided that's what they wanted to do-- when in reality they were just after the prestige of it being a public event, or the faulty information presented regarding such a career-choice, or their lack of suitability for it etc. As a result, we've got a lot of broke, unhappy attention-whores looking for the spotlight via something for which they're simply NOT cut out, rather than people pursuing their TRUE talents-- and fortunes. It's a sad psychology, and unfortunately the current politic fosters it.
Since when is "education" a buzzword?!?
Since the first time a politician used it to get money or laws passed-- basically, to separate the people from their money and freedom.
Just because the state can't quantify all aspects of my sons knowledge (gained through education) with standardized tests doesn't mean that my use of the word with administrators is emotional. In fact, the opposite is true. I agree that government officials tend to use the word rather ambiguously regarding public schools.
When they can put a dollar-amount on it, lemme know. I won't hold my breath, since they never will-- if they did, public schools would end tomorrow.
Schooling should defitely be a means to an end-- and this end should be identifiable; schooling is expensive, time-consuming and difficult, and should be made to show its worth on a monetary basis.
This is why I emphasize return-on-investment as a measure of a school's effectiveness, since it's the only real measure that matters in terms of the student's future; the rest is just hobbies.
False. You are confusing money with earned self-worth, happiness, satisfaction and quality of life - to name a few. As I've grown older, I've come to the conclusion that relationships and hobbies are much more apt to create satisfaction and happiness than money ever could.
Not if you can't sleep on windy nights; business before pleasure. However, under what I'm proposing, your business probably would BE your hobby, since it indicates what you're individually good at. There's a question often asked in career-counselling: "if you won the lotto and could retire, what would you do?" Your answer to this, indicates what you should do for living.
While it's possible that it might not earn as much as something else, the facts are that
1) the enjoyment you'll get from it, in comparision to the gruelling drudgery of something you don't like, DOES have a dollar-value, which only the person can decide;
2) it's more likely to earn more than anything else, since the person will be more "cut out" for it
3) the person is more likely to stick with it, and thus earn more overall in the long run.
Therefore, I view net-earnings as a distillation of the best choice overall-- which is appropriate, since price is simply trading something the customer considers less valuable, for what they consider MORE valuable. Again, this goes back to "unschooling," which follows the individual's initiative and values rather than
imposing them.
Nice that you have your own private vocabulary, but the mainstream majority considers "education" to MEAN "schooling" in the political sense of government programs. I'm speaking modern English-- this IS a political forum, after all, and it's not productive to mince words.
Of course you mean that "you" consider education to mean schooling. Education has a few, modern meanings. I got an education just yesterday watching an old couple interact on the beach at the end of my street.
Lastly, education should be a lifelong pursuit, IMO.
I'm quite familar with Maslow's "hierarchical pyramid of needs," however again a lot of thought did go into my statements to serve a dual-purpose of need-fulfillment. While a person seeks both survival and purpose, they can achieve both BEST, believe it or not, by serving both best; in other words, a person tends to find the greatest purpose in what they ALSO find most lucrative. That might sound simplistic, but it's actually quite advanced and logical.
(continued next message)