A remarkable kid has died in Newcastle, Utah
deseret.com
deseret.com
(One of my favorite anecdotes on this subject: One of the best entrepreneurs I know went down to Mexico and hitchhiked all over when she was 18 years old. And every family that picked her up told her that what she was doing was very dangerous and that she was very lucky to be picked up by that family, instead of someone more dangerous. But at the time she was very innocent. 20 years later I ran into her and I was like "You know what you did was crazy?" and she was like "Now that I think about it, I'm amazed that I survived.")
It's so weird that, from a central Texas perspective, we used to be a short drive from visiting another COUNTRY, which is now effectively a blank space on the map of the world around us. Ski west in New Mexico, eat easy in New Orleans, Hike north in Colorado. South? Here be dragons.
Maybe the next 30 years will be the same story in the opposite direction, but I don't know. I haven't seen anything to give me hope of that.
Sure, the chance of actually being beheaded by a cartel is probably relatively slim, but it's a risk you don't need to take.
I speak fluent Spanish and have traveled all over these areas and I think the original poster’s idea that Mexico is now off limits is about 95% media fear and hype at best.
But hey if they want to stay home in Waco or Uvalde or wherever they live to avoid violent situations that is certainly their choice.
Similar experience with my family in South and Central Texas as well. They used to go multiple times per year, but never go now. Back then the cartels were more targeted with their violence. Over the past 10-15 years, it has become indiscriminate. A cheap tampiquena plate and a few drinks is not worth the risk.
I have never visited Mexico and would love to although I will admit hearing things of this sort and some of the footage I've seen of carjackings and machine-gun fire and the like is admittedly somewhat of a deterrent, but then I consider how many scary things happen here as well and I wonder what's true and what's an exaggeration or simply a case of uniquely bad luck.
And I have family that still visits there, but it is much more dangerous than it used to be. 30 years ago it was basically "don't drive a brand new vehicle and be polite" and now it's all sorts of things including knowing which highways to avoid, how to stay away from parts of town that may have drug lord activity, etc. There was almost an unwritten rule years ago that you don't mess with normal people or tourists; that rule has been significantly broken.
And the border waits are much more annoying, too; the people who do still cross now have to wait much longer, even with Sentri.
You can pull edge cases like Patagonia’s Yvon Chouinard, but even then he spent a lot of time in his 20s running his business.
Less flippantly, you should expect people running high-variance strategies to be overrepresented at the top. The people leading countries may go to school and get law degrees, but if they stay the path of doing what everyone else does but better, they end up an unremarkable partner at a law firm or something, not POTUS or Bezos or Musk. They don't have to literally do life-threateningly dangerous things (although I'm sure the propensity correlates and that's what the previous poster was talking about), but they do have to be willing to risk the comfortable life that was all but guaranteed for them.
This doesn’t make much sense because people inherit their parents’ wealth and businesses all the time.
People also inherit their country’s political leadership e.g. political families and monarchs.
To suggest that it requires a special breed of people to get these positions without proof is rather silly
Political dynasties are important but competition erodes them too. Who’s the most important Kennedy under 40? Whoever they are they’re not that important.
Well, the most famous Kennedy right now is probably Robert F Kennedy Jr. But he is over 40 and luckily is not a succesful leader. But he probably dreams about being one (fighting against the system of evil vaccination).
That's why the overwhelming majority of representatives, both in the business sector as well as governments is lawyers, public servants, academics, engineers, long time party members, and so on. And of course inheritance is the other big factor. The most common form of business is the private family business.
Even in democratic politics inheritance is arguably one of the biggest factors. The Trudeaus and Bush's are your stereotypical leaders
The best of the best likely come from privileged background simply because of the access to resources.
The idea that meritocracy is some of egalitarianism is a myth.
We need to get rid of this idea of meritocracy.
Most teens can't leave the town their parents live in. Student loans aren't gonna pay for your travel and for the folks not going to school, there is a crappy job waiting for them that might give basic health insurance. There simply aren't resources available that allow folks to explore the world.
Another example: From the use of "BRIC"/"BRICS" one might think that those nations would be similar in some way.
I have heard of at least two young Western women who in recent years hitchhiked across China, documenting their experience along the way. One could never, ever imagine doing that in the other BRICS countries (with prewar Russia being the safest of the four, but still pretty risky).
Nations matter. Cultures matter.
Places certainly do change.
History is interpreted by historians, from many sources (newspapers, findings, books, mindset etc), history is NOT "written" but interpreted, and that interpretation can change massively with just one new found source of information.
Maybe you're imagining correlation where there is none?
Probably 60-70% of the classes have the same cookie-cutter Finance/Tech/Consulting backgrounds. Some of the most risk averse and carefully planned professionals you'll find.
His idol was Warren Buffet -- not exactly a reckless risk taker
And he was into regenerative farming. That is very much NOT a "get rich quick" scheme.
It was about building value over the long term.
This comment says more about you than the subject of article (and not in a bad way, just saying it doesn't really apply here)
I don't enjoy articles that preamble about the lack of clouds in the sky.
Here's the meat:
> Kevin drowned in a kayaking accident at a friend’s birthday party. At 14, he had just published his autobiography. He was making plans to expand his 350-acre farm to buy up surrounding farms to convert to regenerative agriculture. He was saving money to build a house for his parents and another for his autistic older brother. He was polishing a movie script and a series of children’s books teaching business literacy for kids. He was looking for a celebrity to endorse his line of luxury toiletries made from the milk of his goat herd. He was breeding heritage turkeys. He was writing guest essays for notable bloggers higher up the political food chain. And, in his spare time, he had the task of grading the road to his farm using the John Deere tractor he bought new for himself for his 11th birthday.
and
> A friend once remarked, “You guys aren’t even raising him; you’re just kind of the audience watching him raise himself.”
> promising no rain as it has for nearly a year
The area was experiencing a drought.
> And then, after 14 months without rain, the well that supplied their house went dry. For nine months the Coopers hauled water by the barrel for their household needs.
Things are different when it’s real rural.
Sure you can’t get a bank loan without an adult involved, but cash is cash. And if you need something for your business and a kid brings it to you, who’s going to look a gift horse in the mouth?
We also traded them for equipment like ATVs, guns, or whatever we needed.
OP has never left the city and so just assumes his life is all life.
Even his statement 'do we' just assumes we all believe as he does.
Cole also probably did what many young business owners do and put it in his parent's names.
Much of this is common place for country folk coming up, this kid just took it to extremes in all the best ways.
Finding lawyer's liens and trading work for property was brilliant- had OP paid attention he'd have had the answers to his doubts.
I know others said it was inspiration porn but I was just incredibly sad we lost such a bright star.
Edit- He-> Cole for clarity
This is speculation, but most likelly he found someone who knew how to do that. In effect he was selling his rabits locally to a middleman, who sold the rabit meat in California to restaurants. And when the story gets told this get to be abbreviated to “sold rabbits to restaurants in California”.
Too many people didn't read the article, or skimmed it.
No one was saying he was selling/trading only locally, even the article says he had a contractor delivering the rabbits for him.
Again- what he did was on a much bigger scale than we did coming up, but no less different thab happens every day.
OP made it sound like fantastical nonsense.
I'm explaining why it is not.
The whole reason that there's a story here is because it's exceptional. If he hadn't been an outlier, there would be no story. There's no conspiracy to embarass your younger self, here.
I bought my first hard drive, drums and television with profits from contract software development when I was 10. I was on my first (non-profit) board of directors when I was 14, and I got a small business loan - co-signed by my father - when I was 15.
None of this is as rare as you so righteously think. The key detail you may have glossed over is that while his parents are disabled, he was clearly very proactive about recruiting mentors and advisors online. He got really great at doing two things: teaching himself new things as they are needed, and developing a network of people who he could ask for help and advice. It's a winning strategy.
Where are the verifiable facts? Where are the citations? You may see the story as just a list of 'verifiable facts,' but that's absolutely not what it is.
I'm not saying I think the whole thing is made up, but it isn't simply a collection of attestations that any individual can verify. It is an emotional, evocative lifestyle story published by an outlet that, as far as I can tell, is outright owned by the LDS church. And the author? They have one other story credit.
I don't know enough about the LDS or this particular publication to make a specific claim, but I guarantee this story has been affected by some kind of agenda or policy position. I find it interesting that the first two 'political bloggers' who 'discovered' his writing are Bari Weiss (a contentious figure certainly, but also one who has vehemently criticized formal/higher education in the US) and Hannah Frankman of the:
> ...Foundation for Economic Education, a nonprofit foundation focusing on teaching young people principles of entrepreneurship and economics, and promoting home-schooling.
Interesting. Oh, look at that:
> Frankman, too, was working on a story about Kevin as an unschooling success story when he died.
Listen, this is a feel good story, and it's not my intention to pick it apart, but don't go after people for taking a hard look at something they come across online. Further, it's possible your self-image (a young gifted outlier) impacts your ability to approach this critically (or see why other people would approach this story critically).
P.s.
There are also just weird anecdotes in the story that make me even more skeptical like the claim he bought a tractor at age 11. Okay, maybe it was a cheap, used tractor? No, the article later states:
> Kevin financed a brand new shiny green John Deere tractor for $50,000.
What? No. An 11 year old did not finance a brand new $50,000 John Deere tractor. There may be some kind of explanation wherein his parents financed it using their credit, but he makes the payments yada, yada, yada... but the very fact the following quote is presented without further explanation in the fifth paragraph of the story is telling:
> And, in his spare time, he had the task of grading the road to his farm using the John Deere tractor he bought new for himself for his 11th birthday.
edit: grammar
And yes, Bari Weiss should be considered a red flag. My bad for letting her name slide past without a sniff test.
I stand by my point that we shouldn't be so damn skeptical that there are exceptional young people, because I've known them personally and arguably flown in the same formations. (I'm no prodigy, but I was encouraged into tech and business very early. Timing and privilege factor in, too.)
That said, I concede to your assertion that it's unacceptable for me to declare the statements in this piece to be "verifiable facts" at this time.
As penance, I offer this gem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ntp6BqhSng
It went something like, the reason there are only child prodigy, and no adult prodigy, is because other kids eventually catch up. And that child prodigies are basically just children that are ahead compared to other kids of the same age.
It looked at the data, and showed that once adult, child prodigies just distribute themselves similarly accross all levels of accomplishments, success and failures as any other adult.
It also said that, once adult, the difference between the best, second best, third best, and all following is much less pronounced, and therefore no one looks so far superior to anyone else who had similar training, opportunity, luck, etc.
Whereas with children, the difference is stark, so people take notice, and that's where the "prodigy" is born.
I can't remember the source, so take it all with a grain of salt, but I always thought it was an interesting article, and a good question, where are all the adult prodigies?
Edit: Also, I vaguely remember it saying that the data shows a higher level of depression and general less happiness in now adult child prodigees, which the article hypothesized might be either from the loss of "being special", or from the weird childhood that "being special" created.
> Surely you believe there are people who are far more accomplished than 99.999% of the population that could be considered as such
This will obviously be a personal interpretation. One could consider the number 1 chess player an adult genius, but as I said, the article discussed that adults are no longer seen as such because the gap between the best and second best and everyone thereafter of similar training and experience is much smaller, so it no longer appears incredible, and people can very well imagine that someone else will soon come along and be even better than they are.
So it's not that there isn't ever one person arguably better at something than everyone else, but that they don't appear to be so due to a genius/prodigy gene, and they're no longer that much better that it seems impossible for anyone else to beat them ever.
Similarly, you'd expect that the best adults would likely have all been child prodigies no? And this appeared to be false based on my memory of that article.
Some of these prodigies do level out, like you say. Often on account of their size being caught up to. But some truly remain remarkable into adulthood and actually hit that Generational talent level (Connor McDavid for instance). There's only been a handful of kids granted this status in the past 20 years (~7). The oldest 3, two turned into superstars (Tavares/Ekblad) and McDavid is generational, simply the best player in the world, full stop. The next is a bust, Sean Day, who at 15 was 6'2 when drafted into the juniors. That would be your everyone catches up example. The others are still too young to say, one is 22 and just beginning (but not looking like a superstar), one was just drafted this summer and likely will play his first game for Seattle this season. Another is the projected 1st overall pick next summer.
But there are definitely the handful of prodigies that pan out at least in the sports world and instead of being called a prodigy - they earn themselves superstardom or get talked about as GOATs (greatest of all time, for the unfamiliar).
If we also look at who are in the generational talent conversation (go in reverse), in the past 20 years all the players who might be mentioned (Crosby, Ovechkin, McDavid) were definitely prodigies as well. So much so that the next generation of prodigies is compared to them, McDavid being called the next coming of Crosby. We may see the next coming of Ovechkin in a young russian player named Matvei Michkov who has been a prodigy in the russian league. Sadly, we may never find out given the political situation and Russia seems more intent on keeping home grown talent in Russia more and more.
Maybe the issue isn't prodigies disappear, it's that in many fields we don't compete like children often do and get recognition? None of my friends have a GPA at work or a spelling bee to win. If all careers were like sports, maybe we would continue to recognize prodigies into adulthood?
> At 14, he had just published his autobiography. He was making plans to expand his 350-acre farm to buy up surrounding farms to convert to regenerative agriculture. He was saving money to build a house for his parents and another for his autistic older brother. He was polishing a movie script and a series of children’s books teaching business literacy for kids. He was looking for a celebrity to endorse his line of luxury toiletries made from the milk of his goat herd. He was breeding heritage turkeys. He was writing guest essays for notable bloggers higher up the political food chain.
As a frame of reference, where I grew up, you could legally drive heavy agricultural lorries (think 5/10 ton dump trucks) on the highways at 14. You were personally running industrial agricultural operations, including running heavy equipment by 12 or younger. If you grow up in those societies, you learn the ropes young and are given the opportunity to grow into your capability. In a way, it was kind of cool because kids were allowed to assume real responsibility so young and some kids are capable of running the entire operation. (This is kind of a loophole in US child labor laws but it isn't grinding in factory or something like that. And traditionally the kids that do this make some fine money.)
In this specific case, I expect the Mormon connection was doing a lot of heavy lifting behind the scenes. Still, many rural areas encourage this kind of thing from a very young age and I can't say I wasn't a part of that. It is part of how they apprentice you into becoming competent at agriculture.
I cannot attest about this particular case, but I can believe that in a similar situation today with all the access to resources through technology we have, the things that capable kids under these conditions could do would be far more reaching than ever.
> In this specific case, I expect the Mormon connection was doing a lot of heavy lifting behind the scenes.
Well yes, this is the meat. Tight knit, insular, often wealthy (or connected to wealth).
> His spelling and grammar lagged behind grade level. He consistently misspelled the word “business,” and stumbled over the pronunciation of simple words.
doesn't really spell hidden genius of the 21st century but probably describes millions of peasants in Europe during the middle-ages. Family died of the plague, so son got a businessman at age 9. It happened a lot, but they were just some other serf and didn't have ideologists (recall the NYT-author who resigned because "woke") who celebrate going fullspeed back to the middle ages.
That’s ridiculous.
The number two post on HN, when you posted this, was how poor writing/reading skills are the biggest barrier to understanding legal language.
What's being described isn't the ability to diagram a sentence, but to write above a certain minimum standard. That skill is certainly more important for the average person than understanding tax law as most jobs that would require you to know tax law have good writing skills as a pre-requisite.
As part of my previous work in education I did a lot of interventions for "unschooled" children in the Bay Area and can confirm the results of even well educated parents were almost uniformly disastrous.
There's a lot of value in:
1. Being well socialized
2. Having the standard set of skills that are a base requirement for being a white collar worker
If you're missing either of these (as most homeschooled kids are) it can be very difficult to find your way in the world.
In short, children who don't learn to read or write well in school almost certainly would not learn to read or write well when unschooled, but most unschooled children who don't learn to read or write well do learn perfectly fine in a traditional schooling environment.
Schooled children who don't learn to read for different and harder to deal with reasons, a quick top 3:
1. English as a second language (ESL)
2. Learning disability that was never addressed
3. Severe behavior problems that interfere with schooling (this is often caused by problems at home)
These problems are exacerbated by parents who are poorer or themselves ESL.
Unschooled kids, conversely, tend to have relatively affluent parents who speak fluent English. Overwhelmingly, the reason they can't read or write is that either no attempt at teaching was made, or it was made with no reference to educational theory. This failure mode is much rarer in schools.
P.S. I don't want to give the impression here that I think the US education system isn't a tire fire or that there aren't different pedagogical approaches that might be radically better for most children. I'm just saying I have nearly a decade of experience showing overwhelmingly that "unschooling", even when performed by some of the most educated and affluent people in society, fails overwhelmingly compared to even the sub-par experience of standard schooling in the US.
no, but about half the other posts here do - so I put down what my perception of the case is.
> with emphasis on his business acumen
To me, the business acumen of his parents seems a lot higher. On their twitter they start publishing his future books already :). Also there is a lot of financing (for example his John Deere) going on and while I can't see the full picture, I doubt that he signed those contracts...
> Later, when opportunities came to publish his thoughts, the written word became more important to him and he found mentors to help him polish his communication skills.
Worthy of note is that he'd published a book by the age of 14, so was probably at least at grade level. Sounds like he just didn't learn things homogeneously, but rather focused on some things before other things.
But publishing on itself does not require anything.
Thins kid also supposedly bought 50000$ by himself at 11.
There are too many red flags and people with agendas here to take much at face value.
What a human. Such a great balance of a healthy brain and the confidence to trust it.
You wish to take away the very condition which made him uniquely special. He seems like he was enjoying his childhood. Adversity breeds character and this kid had more than character than some entire classrooms.
Do you think this is a positive example of how adversity breeds character?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territ...
People who don't know anything about homeschooling and the myriad ways it differs from public school and private school -- it's a little like a bunch of Christians commenting on the life of a Muslim individual, having never studied their religion or culture or a bunch of Europeans in big cities commenting on the life of someone in a rural village in Africa.
I wrote a wall of text and deleted it. I just don't know where to begin to try to explain and have it not go sideways.
You take, say, 30 kids who happen live in the same area and are born within a particular year and shove them together in a class and they are all being shaped by the same teacher, the same curriculum, the same school system, their parents may know each other or may not etc.
I think you are likely attributing overly much to the children per se and not to the forces shaping a group of children. And I think we have done a lot of harm to how humans think about age differences generally. I feel like as a society we have an excess of baggage concerning dating someone of a different age, as just one example.
Reading this again and trying to find some way there was something not preventable and not finding it makes me angrier and angrier. Why the hell are you in a boat without a life preserver if you can't swim.
So angry.
I think that’s a good part of why helmets took over skiing in Colorado but not California. In Colorado, the extreme skiers wore them, and the rest followed.
Also, if you can’t swim, don’t be embarrassed! A lot of people can’t and honestly no one is judging you because you can’t swim. Go to your local pool and see if they offer adult classes and if not see if there is someone willing to teach you.
> He was making plans to expand his 350-acre farm to buy up surrounding farms to convert to regenerative agriculture.
Kudos to him.
Every death is unfortunate, but I understand why the death of someone who shows deep care for people around him, for nature, for the world, is especially saddening.
I can’t imagine any other situation where a parent would essentially dedicate their life to support their child’s development.
It sounds like he thrived in the specific set of conditions that he was raised in. Would that be true if he had grown up middle class and went to a traditional public school and force-fed common core nonsense?
Given that we wanted her to be able to swim with them, we paid a professional to give her swimming lessons.
She's now 11, but any time in the last ~5 years, tipping over in a canoe or kayak would not have been fatal for her (even without a life vest).
What goes in, trickles down, and comes out the other end. With the power structure, teachers have some, but others have far more. That's where the accountability (read: blame) needs to go. Blaming the powerless is a fool's errand.
That is, for example, we can sign off billions to foreign countries, and at home our teachers are going out of pocket for supplies. Huh? I'm not suggesting that we don't help others. I am insisting that if we can do that, we can certainly do better for teachers, and other similar high-value (to the future) professions.
I know some people look at it as the whole 'self-made capitalist can do anything' sort of ideal but to me I see the failures of multiple systems.
“Then Kevin discovered the wealth of information in county property and tax records, including the concept of “lawyers’ liens.” A lawyer who is owed money from a client can put a lien on the client’s property to get paid when the land is sold, just like a tax lien. And lawyers’ liens can be bought and sold. Kevin found one such lien languishing in the Iron County property records and bought it for half the value from the lawyer who had forgotten it was there. Kevin doubled his money when the property sold within a few weeks.”
The hand waved details of this purchase and sale illuminated the authors intentional bias for me.
In general, I don’t really understand the dismissal of the use of systems language for social topics. Other domains on this site are debated in very analytical terms looking at historical factors and second order effects.
What makes social issues different where it’s uncouth to perform the same type of analyses?
I would imagine this kid was on a similar level of genius, but seemingly more interested in making as much money as humanly possible instead.
I dunno, but I find that remarkably stupid, but I guess US has different standards for what's remarkable.
"But on a hot day last June, at nearby Newcastle Reservoir, Kevin drowned in a kayaking accident at a friend’s birthday party."
Article is worth reading. I think the title is pretty accurate, assuming the details are true.
assuming the details are true
It's less likely the story is true than that it's a GoFundMe scam.
I then noticed a tidbit of information in another article about it that somehow made me feel different: Cole Summers didn't know how to swim. He was out on the water in a kayak, with no life jacket, with only an autistic child for company - and didn't know how to swim.
Somehow it stopped feeling like a tragic accident and more like carelessness and stupidity, and I just didn't feel as bad. I'm sorry it happened, and my heart goes out to his family, but this was avoidable.
Somehow among all the crazy stuff he learned and accomplished at such a young age, basic common sense seems to have been dodged.
Just wanted to add that they save folks that can swim as well. A lot of folks can swim a little, but not enough to get to shore if they are in the middle of a lake and wouldn't handle a current really well. Heck, even if you swim well, exhaustion is a danger. Life jackets help folks. Period.
The other lesson repeatedly drummed into us by our mother is to never jump into water without checking it first. There are also many stories of people becoming paralysed after diving into water.
The last lesson is to be careful of people drowning. If you get too close they can grab onto you, pulling you underwater and cause you to drown. If someone is drowning, either grab them from behind, or use a stick or I guess be at a distance where they can't pull you under.
One last lesson I learnt as a kid was to stay clear of dogs swimming - if they get too close they can claw you while doggy paddling.
This is no longer about the original topic, instead I'm going off on a tangent inspired by your comment.
I'm curious if you could do something with this short comment: I only really felt I "got" swimming when I felt as comfortable under as above water, and more importantly, dynamically mixing the two. As long as my swimming mode, in the early days. concentrated on staying above water, from today's point of view it was maybe the quarter of the way to swimming safely at most.
Staying completely submerged during swimming while you don't need air saves a lot of energy, you can just swim through big ocean waves without being bothered, etc. Also, being used to spending most of the time completely submerged makes it easier to deal with when it happens accidentally.
A swimmer trying to keep their head above the water at all times, I don't think that this works very well unless conditions (of oneself too) are ideal or close to it.
Even then, I think I heard it in one American astronaut's interview about his training, additional high-stress training under water that you can't usually get because it has to be well managed by other people including safety divers, would still be missing from a normal person's experience. As a new diver I got into a very mild panic only once, fortunately close enough to shore (California kelp forests off a Monterey beach), and it was bad enough. I would not want to be caught in some eddy unable to surface with mounting alarm. Still, being comfortable doing most of the swimming submerged already is a huge step up from head-above-water mode swimming.
One should also have reviewed the local water currents and what to do when one is caught, but that's another issue.
If I were 500m from shore, weighed down by clothing, and dealing with waves and/or currents, that could be a disaster.
This is more what I was responding to: ...and I just didn't feel as bad.
I wonder if your anger matches that which his caretakers feel at themselves.
By contrast I don't feel that bad hearing secondhand stories about easily preventable deaths. There were like 4 ways to prevent this - use a lifejacket, know how to swim, be with an adult, or at least don't fall out of your boat. I don't spend time worrying about how people I care about could die if they made a series of specific stupid decisions stacked on top of one another.
It's still sad for those involved, but from a distance I can no longer relate to it emotionally.
It's like going to jump with a parachute, by yourself, having never done so before.
It's a stupid, stupid risk and dying is not accidental or unexpected.
> More children ages 1–4 die from drowning than any other cause of death except birth defects. For children ages 1–14, drowning is the second leading cause of unintentional injury death after motor vehicle crashes.
Definitely worth taking seriously - and not being able to swim is a risk factor. My kids have been taking lessons since they were in preschool, but even then I don't let them out of sight when we're in the water because they still aren't very strong swimmers.
In rural communities, people are dying of many things, like not having medical care, drug addiction, murder, suicide, etc.
Obviously fate made this outing seem like a bad idea in hindsight, but I'd also say that leaving a 14 year kid to support a family of 4 is a bad idea in foresight.
i.e. if this is your takeaway, (respectfully) consider a different perspective
https://www.oregon.gov/ode/learning-options/HomeSchool/Pages...
I think the challenge is less about the mechanics (reading, writing) and more about the content expressed via these, as there has to be some element of common content as well.
Their criteria is pretty basic “you need to be able to comprehend a 800-word news article”, and we are often failing to meet those standards with alternative education (which isn’t even just homeschooling, parochial systems have issues here too.)
At the end of the day, a service worker needs to be able to read the prices being wrung up on the cash register, and a factory worker should be able to read an instruction manual and safety rules. Not meeting those basic standards basically relegates you to a very small amount of jobs.
Taking standardized tests in my youth was always a nice break - massively easier than the actual schoolwork I was doing.
No if you mean cutting away majority of curriculum and teaching the rest by having kid doing sheets alone on kitchen table until isolated bored kid slows or gives up.
Most public schools are clearly more abusive than simply not subjecting your children to the standard industrial schooling regimen.
Especially, what my father explained to me (he directed projects and extracurricular 'homework help' (+ free food) for kids in the poor neighborhood of my city at the time) was that the most important for success in school was parental implication, and that if you compared kids in 'regular' school with present and interested parents (often children of teachers, or children with one stay at home parent and few siblings) to kids in 'special school' (Montessori at the time i think), there was no practical difference on their success later. He told us his job was to try his best to have his street educators bridge the gap between parents and school, and if it wasn't possible, to offer a more collective and affirmative way of learning/doing in his extracurricular center.
(weird translation, sorry if it isn't understandable, there is a lot of specific vocabulary i tried to simplify then translate).
It was only his impression, but I've worked with children from my 14th birthday to my 25th, and my personal experience (i taught science through experiment with an association both at public schools and at summer camps) tends to confirm that what's really matter in engagement from the parents.
This has not been my experience at all.
I’ve found I don’t typically use my experience specifically on school because it just can’t have been the norm.
People with disabilities are capable of doing wrong, and we shouldn't pretend otherwise.
it looks like it was the same here. He essentially practiced the life of a middle age peasant. I guess many had their farm going by the age of 12 ... and probably didn't have some weird capitalistic, and nationalist inspiration porn ideologist in the background (because writing a pseudonymous book and then dying to young sounds like that... also the wondrous mentors...)
see for example: https://greatbasingreen.com/about-us-2/ (who is we? - would anyone write like that about themselves with those achievements ) https://www.amazon.com/Dont-Tell-Cant-Ambitious-Homeschooler...
For the truly remarkable (and the subject here seems to fit that), sticking them in any factory-like school setting is a waste. Un-schooling the majority of children would be an interesting social experiment that I'd rather see in a different country first.
The brightest candles burn out the fastest, wasn't that they saying, roughly?