[valkyrieanne]

I don't think it's an either/or situation. Some people are going to homeschool. Others are going to send their kids to public or private schools. Some at one point or another may have experience with all three.

I don't know why it's necessary to overstate the case so radically. If you look at scientific and technical universities like Purdue, MIT, University of CA at Berkeley, etc. you see that the vast majority of their students come from public schools. The vast majority of National Merit Scholars, national Science Fair winners, etc. come from public schools.

This obviously doesn't mean "all public schools are good" any more than Blumenfeld's essay means "all public schools are bad." What it does mean is that obviously *some* public schools are quite good in spite of all Blumenfeld says.

My view is that people should be entirely free to homeschool and not have their homeschooling regulated by the government. I believe basically the same thing about private schooling as well. But you don't see good private schools engaging in hyperbolic public school bashing, and I wonder why it's necessary for *some* homeschoolers to do it. It seems counterproductive.

[Tailgunner Joe]

The education system must be supported by the taxpayer. If the taxpayers did not have to fork over the cash to support this inept system, they could afford to send their kids to private school if they wanted. Most people cannot afford to homeschool for the same reason, like luckystarmom. Homeschoolers are even expected to pay for supporting the Socialized Education system that they oppose.

If you look at scientific and technical universities like Purdue, MIT, University of CA at Berkeley, etc. you see that the vast majority of their students come from public schools. The vast majority of National Merit Scholars, national Science Fair winners, etc. come from public schools.

Of course they do, because most people in the country can't afford to send their kids to private school.