The Duggars and Their World: Fashion, Food, Finance, Schoolin’ and Child Rearin'

[Rhondinella]

Is it possible Gothard's degree was honorary?

 

 

A Ph.D. cannot be granted honorarily.  There are honorary doctorates, but they are called something else.  The most common are Doctor of Letters (D.Litt.), Doctor of Humane Letters (D.H.L.), and Doctor of Divinity (D.D.)  I'm sure there are others but these are the ones I encounter the most.  The D.D. is the most common doctorate received honorarily by those in Christian ministry.  Many famous pastors of large churches, or leaders of Christian organizations who call themselves "Dr" are actually D.D.s.  That's not necessarily a bad thing: as stated above an honorary doctorate can sometimes be very well-warranted when granted in recognition of a lifetime of significant achievement and experience. The problem is when those with honorary doctorates take it (and themselves) too seriously and consider themselves academically on the same level with Ph.D when (generally speaking, of course) they are not.

 

That's assuming this guy actually HAS a Ph.D. I was going based on what I read elsewhere.  But it's certainly not impossible to go around saying you have a Ph.D when you don't.

[ramble]

I can't even imagine what happened when Smuggar and Anna bought a foreclosure in AK

This is not a big deal, just a personal pet peeve. Arkansas is AR.

I have no idea of the costs of the houses the Duggars have been dealing with but prices in NWA vary quite a bit depending on the area. I have easy access to title records but don't care enough to put out the effort. I also have a sneaking suspicion that if I checked I'd feel like I crossed the line from poking a bit of fun of folks online to weird stalker curiosity.

[becca3891]

 

I'm not sure how their afterlife theology works. Some beliefs cast all but the very few (the righteous remnant) into hell, others give the most dedicated and truest believers the highest rewards in heaven - you'll hear phrases like "you earned stars/jewels for your crown" or "your mansion is going to be right next to God's throne" things like that.

The afterlife theology is pretty simple -- "accept Jesus into your heart as your personal savior" or spend eternity in hell. That's standard for any fairly conservative Christian, even ones far less extreme than the Duggars. It's most definitely the belief at the church Cathy and Amy attend.

[GEML]

But what heaven looks like actually varies pretty wildly, and what your reward will be is often vastly different between groups. That was more my point, not the hell part.

[becca3891]

Oh, I thought you were questioning whether or not they think most people will end up in hell, which of course they do think. You're right that there's probably a lot of variation on how Christians view heaven. They may feel that all the things they obey that "god lays on their hearts" are earning them bonus points compared to more worldly Christians.

[GEML]

And I wouldn't be surprised, honestly, if the Duggars were ever questioned about their wealth, within their circle, if they didn't come back with a "of course, our true reward is in heaven" or, "I can only dream how lovely the stars are going to be in your crown" kind of stuff.

[Skittl1321]

Are the Duggars still shilling for College Plus?

 

I wonder if the College Plus people mind that no one has actually gotten a degree...  It seems like they would want to advertise using people who were successful with their service. CP allowed them to study for tons of AP and CLEP tests and test out of a ton of college and look how much money it saved them! And now they've graduated college in just 2 years and debt free!  YAY!

 

But what they have is uneducated clowns who have probably never actually taken a credit test.  How is that a good advertisement?

 

 

*Also- College Plus is a prep-program. It isn't a school.  It drives me crazy when people talk about it like it is a school. /end personal rant

[GEML]

I haven't heard them mention College Plus for years.

[Missy Vixen]

Don't know if it's the right thread to ask. But I've looked at fundie colleges. Pensacola, BYU, BJU their rules are fucking ridiculous. If I may ask what fundie college did you attend? How was it?

I went to Northwest College (now Northwest University) in Kirkland, WA. The rules are the same as they were when I was there -- draconian and ridiculous. (Chaperoned dating, curfews, required attendance at chapel each day, dress code, on and on and on). I had to sign an affidavit stating that I would not drink, smoke, dance, fornicate, use substances of any sort, and abide by all posted rules of Northwest or be subject to immediate expulsion. I met with my advisor the first day on campus. I asked him if it was okay to take classes toward my Youth Ministries major as a freshman. "It doesn't matter what classes you take. You'll get your MRS. degree before you graduate," he said. If I was smarter, I would have run. Not one of my credits transferred to the local community college when I went back to school years later. I am thankful to this day I left before graduating and racking up more debt.

 

My point: People who go to Bible college either go so far into the church they'll never get out again, or they walk away from their faith. I was one of the latter.

 

I work with someone who graduated from Pensacola. Her future in-laws chaperoned every date with her husband. He's a devotee of the Mark Driscoll/Mars Hill Church school of "complementarianism", which is a fancy word for "oppress and browbeat your wife and kids".

 

If the Duggars' faith is as strong as they claim, why not allow their children to obtain an actual education that isn't taught by someone with a high school diploma around a dining room table, or by a "college" that's little more than social interaction/matchmaking for fundies?

[Almost 3000]

^^^I went freshman & sophomore years to private religious college with similar rules to those but all my credits transferred but one for class to a CA university the next year. Guess I was lucky.

[Wellfleet]

^^^I went freshman & sophomore years to private religious college with similar rules to those but all my credits transferred but one for class to a CA university the next year. Guess I was lucky.

 

Not lucky at all. But it sounds like you were SMART enough to attend regionally-accredited schools both times! Plus it sounds like most of what you took at School A fit well into your program at School B. 

[GEML]

Some religious schools take their accreditation VERY seriously. My father was one who insisted on it not only for in his own school, but served as a Trustee for a college within his denomination and pushed for it there, and served on several committees to provide oversight on Christian colleges trying to obtain it. He wanted Christian colleges to provide an atmosphere where Christian culture might be the majority culture, but scholarship was scholarship, and the students produced could be lined up against those from any comparable secular college.

Not all colleges (Christian or not) care about this, but more so than you think.

[Rhondinella]

Yes, to add to that . . . there is a huge difference between "Bible Schools" and Christian universities.   A short taxonomy of Christian institutions of higher learning (the field I have spent my career in).

 

At the top you have a regionally accredited Christian college or university, of which there are thousands in the country (I have worked at several) are usually very legitimate educational/academic institutions.  You can earn degrees in a variety of fields.  The thing that differentiates a "college" from a "university" is that universities have to offer at least one graduate degree (master's degree or above).  Colleges only offer undergraduate degrees.

 

These Christian colleges and universities have to meet the same accrediting criteria as state and regional schools do. In fact, in many places Christian colleges are known for giving better educations in certain fields than state or public universities. The program in Biological Sciences/Pre-Med at the former Christian institution I worked for is considered the best in the state with a 100% acceptance rate to med schools, and those grads are also in high demand from state universities for grad programs.  Of course, not all Christian schools are necessarily this high quality, but there are many that are.  They may not have the facilities that state universities do, but they often make up for that in allowing for a much smaller faculty/student ratio which allows for more one-on-one mentoring.

 

Comparatively, Bible Colleges award 2 and 4-year college degrees (AA, BA, BS, etc) but usually only in fields related to theology, ministry and Bible.  You couldn't go there to do, say, a degree in Accounting.  Many are accredited, but some are not.

 

Then you have the much more nebulous category of "Bible School", for which there doesn't seem to be a formal definition or any guidelines about who can and can't use that title. These are usually non-degree granting institutions where you only earn a "certificate" or "diploma" or some other kind of qualification to go into ministry in a particular group or denomination.  There is often little if any regulation of such institutions, or if there is it is regulation from within the group or denomination in charge, not outside objective critics (like you get in the regional accreditation process). Generally if the school is unaccredited and only offers certificates, diplomas or qualifications, not actual degrees, then I wouldn't take the training there very seriously in terms of academics.

 

It can be confusing because people not familiar with the system sometimes use the terms interchangeably, as in calling any school that is associated with Christianity a "Bible college" when in reality that is a specific kind of institution, and because there isn't a lot of clarity about what constitutes a "Bible School."

 

Edited to add, because no one asked: There are also Seminaries, which people sometimes confuse the schools above.  Seminaries are graduate schools--for students who have already completed a bachelor's degree--and they offer master's and doctorate degrees in fields related to theology and ministry.  In some denominations a Seminary degree is required to become an ordained minister (more common in the "high church" traditions than in the more congregational/evangelical ones).

[Missy Vixen]

Rhondinella, thank you so much for clarifying the differences between the various types of higher learning. ;-)

[Rhondinella]

You're welcome.  I realize in re-reading that I should probably go through and edit some mistakes but . . . eh, it's summer.  Gotta turn the academic side of me off occasionally :-)

[flyingdi]

A question for you homeschoolers out there or people with knowledge of homeschooling. I know laws vary from state to state but what is the absolute bare minimum needed in homeschooling to pass high school?

I assume it's basic math, reading comprehension and writing. What else? A language? Advanced courses? Physical education of any kind? Are any electives required? Do any of you know?

[Kcat1971]

A question for you homeschoolers out there or people with knowledge of homeschooling. I know laws vary from state to state but what is the absolute bare minimum needed in homeschooling to pass high school?

I assume it's basic math, reading comprehension and writing. What else? A language? Advanced courses? Physical education of any kind? Are any electives required? Do any of you know?

 

It varies from state to state.  Here are the requirements for Arkansas:

http://www.arkansased.gov/divisions/learning-services/home-schools

State law requires that home school students test each year.  Currently students in grades 3-9 test. Parents/legal guardians that are registered for the current school year will receive written notification of the test dates, times and site.

[flyingdi]

Thanks!

[Darknight]

A question for you homeschoolers out there or people with knowledge of homeschooling. I know laws vary from state to state but what is the absolute bare minimum needed in homeschooling to pass high school?

In Arkansas or just any state?

Edited May 23, 2015 by Darknight

[flyingdi]

Really in any state. I am just looking for the bare minimum average of what a kid being homeschooled needs to know to be considered a high school graduate. Is it vastly different from public or private school? Honestly, I went to parochial school most of my life so I really don't know.

[Darknight]

Really in any state. I am just looking for the bare minimum average of what a kid being homeschooled needs to know to be considered a high school graduate. Is it vastly different from public or private school? Honestly, I went to parochial school most of my life so I really don't know.

In my state it requires yearly testing and a lot of paperwork. English (four units) social studies (four units) which includes one unit of American history, one-half unit in participation in government, and one-half unit economics; mathematics (two units); science (two units); art and/or music (one unit); health education (one-half unit); physical education (two units); and three units of electives. My daughter just follows the local public school graduation requirements but goes above and beyond. She had enough credits to graduate junior year. I'm required, we'll mot anymore because she's over 17 but homeschoolers are required to register with the central office of homeschooling, send their loi, ihip, and qr. Plus testing.

*Letter of intent, Individualized Home Educational plan, Quartely report.

[Chai]

LOVE the title of this thread! haha! :-)

[flyingdi]

Thanks, Darkknight!

[Rhetorica]

I assumed that the Coogan Bill applied to all television shows and that 15% of the children's earnings was set aside in a trust. But it's only a law in California. So are the Diggers paid as a family unit, or are the children paid separately?

[roamyn]

Although JP Morgan is a piece of crap... Maybe they have more in common than we know.

i think wellfleet meant the real JP Morgan, who was indeed a financial & industial genius.

[lilabennet]

I assumed that the Coogan Bill applied to all television shows and that 15% of the children's earnings was set aside in a trust. But it's only a law in California. So are the Diggers paid as a family unit, or are the children paid separately?

I think the answer at the moment is that Jim Bob is paid and it is up to his discretion how to dole out the cash, but I am not sure.  My original post on this subject was as follows:

 

I have only watched bits and pieces of episodes here and there, and I have never been on a Duggar board before, so I am sorry if this has been addressed in the past on PTV, but I have a question about the money that has been earned through the show.  I thought it would make sense to ask here because of posts expressing concern about the financial future of the younger children post-TLC, and I hope there is a lawyerly type here who can help me out:

 

Do any child actor laws apply to reality TV stars in situations like this?  Isn't it a legal requirement that children who earn money at a young age are supposed to save a significant portion of their earnings for their use after they turn 18?  I know they are not "acting" in the traditional sense, but I think an argument can be made that appearing on this show has been their job, so a portion of the "salary" must be put aside for them to use at their discretion without any reference to their parents' directives on how to spend that money. Am I way off base?  I assume that as of right now the parents have not set individual accounts aside for their children, because it has not been addressed on each child's 18th birthday.  But that doesn't necessarily mean that they are in accord with whatever law would cover a case like this.  If one of the kids had to take this to civil court to set a new precedent, what are their chances of winning? (I know this assumes that any of them would actually be interested in suing their parents in the first place; I am mostly interested in the hypothetical.)

 

I just would really like for these children to have some independent financial protection once the show is canceled, which I think is the most likely outcome.  And even if the show isn't canceled, I still think they deserve to be paid for their work!

I have since tried to look into it myself, but I am not a lawyer so who knows if my speculation is correct.

 

From what I found I think that there is no law in Arkansas to protect a child's entertainment earnings from their parent.  There is a law (http://www.dol.gov/whd/state/childentertain.htm#Arkansas and  http://www.labor.ar.gov/divisions/Documents/child_labor_laws_and_regs.pdf) that requires a work permit be approved and filed for every child who works in entertainment.  The criteria for "works in entertainment" is worded such that I think work permits would be required in this case, but I could be wrong.  If I am correct I can't imagine that TLC's legal department would have missed this, so permits were probably filed.  They have to be renewed every 6 months and there are rules about how many hours a day and which hours of the day children can work.  Ironically, there is plenty of legalese in the document describing how the State must be paid for issuing permits and where those funds will go, but nothing about where any money due to the child must go.  (The permits also require that the child's wage be listed, so maybe I am wrong about all of this anyway??!)  Any insight on any of this would be appreciated.

 

Can a lawyer answer another question for me, please:

From my very, very basic understanding of the legal system, I was under the impression that, since no body of laws could possibly be comprehensive, there is a lot of interpretation left open to the discretion of judges all along the way up to the Supreme Court.  In a specific case where no legal precedent has been established, judges will look to precedent in other states to inform their decisions.  Does this apply only to interpretation of existing laws or could a lawyer argue in a state where there is actually a void of law pertaining to a specific issue that it is permissible to look to other states for a solution?  I assume there is no recourse in a case like this except to try to push for a change to the laws themselves in the state senate, but I don't know enough about law to know.

 

I know I am kind of beating a dead horse in wanting to know where all the money they have earned through the show is going, but I think it is an extremely important issue.  Money is mobility.  Many domestic violence victims never leave their husbands/wives/boyfriends/girlfriends/parents/whatever because they simply do not have the money to get away or they are dependent on their abuser's income.  The dependence these kids have on their father's TLC money because of their lack of education or marketable skills is yet another form of control that I think he has no right to, not only because it is wrong to exert so much control over other human beings, but because they should each have benefited monetarily from the show in their own right.  Of course, being paid for the train wreck their lives have been for the past 10 years (!!) will not make up for very much emotional damage, but I think getting away from the situation and finding outside help could be the first step for many of them and money can only help with that.

Edited May 24, 2015 by lilabennet

[Rhetorica]

I think the answer at the moment is that Jim Bob is paid and it is up to his discretion how to dole out the cash, but I am not sure. My original post on this subject was as follows:

I have since tried to look into it myself, but I am not a lawyer so who knows if my speculation is correct.

From what I found I think that there is no law in Arkansas to protect a child's entertainment earnings from their parent. There is a law (http://www.dol.gov/whd/state/childentertain.htm#Arkansas and http://www.labor.ar.gov/divisions/Documents/child_labor_laws_and_regs.pdf) that requires a work permit be approved and filed for every child who works in entertainment. The criteria for "works in entertainment" is worded such that I think work permits would be required in this case, but I could be wrong. If I am correct I can't imagine that TLC's legal department would have missed this, so permits were probably filed. They have to be renewed every 6 months and there are rules about how many hours a day and which hours of the day children can work. Ironically, there is plenty of legalese in the document describing how the State must be paid for issuing permits and where those funds will go, but nothing about where any money due to the child must go. (The permits also require that the child's wage be listed, so maybe I am wrong about all of this anyway??!) Any insight on any of this would be appreciated.

Can a lawyer answer another question for me, please:

From my very, very basic understanding of the legal system, I was under the impression that, since no body of laws could possibly be comprehensive, there is a lot of interpretation left open to the discretion of judges all along the way up to the Supreme Court. In a specific case where no legal precedent has been established, judges will look to precedent in other states to inform their decisions. Does this apply only to interpretation of existing laws or could a lawyer argue in a state where there is actually a void of law pertaining to a specific issue that it is permissible to look to other states for a solution? I assume there is no recourse in a case like this except to try to push for a change to the laws themselves in the state senate, but I don't know enough about law to know.

I know I am kind of beating a dead horse in wanting to know where all the money they have earned through the show is going, but I think it is an extremely important issue. Money is mobility. Many domestic violence victims never leave their husbands/wives/boyfriends/girlfriends/parents/whatever because they simply do not have the money to get away or they are dependent on their abuser's income. The dependence these kids have on their father's TLC money because of their lack of education or marketable skills is yet another form of control that I think he has no right to, not only because it is wrong to exert so much control over other human beings, but because they should each have benefited monetarily from the show in their own right. Of course, being paid for the train wreck their lives have been for the past 10 years (!!) will not make up for very much emotional damage, but I think getting away from the situation and finding outside help could be the first step for many of them and money can only help with that.

Thanks lilabennet. You've researched quite a bit. I'm not surprised that the state protects itself and has less concern for children. It would be nice if parents voluntarily saved the children's salary but since many have not, laws must be made for the children's best interest. Bless the beasts and the children, indeed.

[Happyfatchick]

Can a lawyer answer another question for me, please:

From my very, very basic understanding of the legal system, I was under the impression that, since no body of laws could possibly be comprehensive, there is a lot of interpretation left open to the discretion of judges all along the way up to the Supreme Court.  In a specific case where no legal precedent has been established, judges will look to precedent in other states to inform their decisions.  Does this apply only to interpretation of existing laws or could a lawyer argue in a state where there is actually a void of law pertaining to a specific issue that it is permissible to look to other states for a solution?  I assume there is no recourse in a case like this except to try to push for a change to the laws themselves in the state senate, but I don't know enough about law to know.

 

 

Wow, you did do a lot of work!  There is another poster who self-identified to be an attorney on another thread.  You might want to pm them to please come on this thread and answer your questions.  I believe their posting name is Lilyofthevalley.  And I believe if you go to the message section and start t type that name in, you'll get a dropdown of possible matches who would be on this forum.

[CofCinci]

Well, I guess we all now know why they sleep in their day clothing...

[Diffy]

I think the answer at the moment is that Jim Bob is paid and it is up to his discretion how to dole out the cash, but I am not sure.  My original post on this subject was as follows:

I have since tried to look into it myself, but I am not a lawyer so who knows if my speculation is correct.

 

From what I found I think that there is no law in Arkansas to protect a child's entertainment earnings from their parent.  There is a law (http://www.dol.gov/whd/state/childentertain.htm#Arkansas and  http://www.labor.ar.gov/divisions/Documents/child_labor_laws_and_regs.pdf) that requires a work permit be approved and filed for every child who works in entertainment.  The criteria for "works in entertainment" is worded such that I think work permits would be required in this case, but I could be wrong.  If I am correct I can't imagine that TLC's legal department would have missed this, so permits were probably filed.  They have to be renewed every 6 months and there are rules about how many hours a day and which hours of the day children can work.  Ironically, there is plenty of legalese in the document describing how the State must be paid for issuing permits and where those funds will go, but nothing about where any money due to the child must go.  (The permits also require that the child's wage be listed, so maybe I am wrong about all of this anyway??!)  Any insight on any of this would be appreciated.

 

Can a lawyer answer another question for me, please:

From my very, very basic understanding of the legal system, I was under the impression that, since no body of laws could possibly be comprehensive, there is a lot of interpretation left open to the discretion of judges all along the way up to the Supreme Court.  In a specific case where no legal precedent has been established, judges will look to precedent in other states to inform their decisions.  Does this apply only to interpretation of existing laws or could a lawyer argue in a state where there is actually a void of law pertaining to a specific issue that it is permissible to look to other states for a solution?  I assume there is no recourse in a case like this except to try to push for a change to the laws themselves in the state senate, but I don't know enough about law to know.

 

I know I am kind of beating a dead horse in wanting to know where all the money they have earned through the show is going, but I think it is an extremely important issue.  Money is mobility.  Many domestic violence victims never leave their husbands/wives/boyfriends/girlfriends/parents/whatever because they simply do not have the money to get away or they are dependent on their abuser's income.  The dependence these kids have on their father's TLC money because of their lack of education or marketable skills is yet another form of control that I think he has no right to, not only because it is wrong to exert so much control over other human beings, but because they should each have benefited monetarily from the show in their own right.  Of course, being paid for the train wreck their lives have been for the past 10 years (!!) will not make up for very much emotional damage, but I think getting away from the situation and finding outside help could be the first step for many of them and money can only help with that.

 

Well, you have done a lot of work, and the results of your research are pretty much the same as mine.  I've been looking into this stuff since about 2007. ;)  Yes, AR Child Labor Laws do not have a Coogan-type protection for children working in entertainment.

 

A couple of problems here:

 

1.  You are asking for responses from lawyers only.  I am not a lawyer.  I'm just interested in laws pertaining to children in entertainment.

2.  If I try to respond properly and with relevant details I will go way off topic into other non-Reality TV families to prove my points.  I'd rather not do that.

 

So, bottom line, unless a Duggar comes forward with a tell-all book: 

 

a) My research indicates that Reality TV contracts are confidential, closely guarded and rarely leaked - because of massive penalties for breaching the terms. 

b)  We will never know the true terms of how the Duggars divide up the cash.  Anyone who states that they "know" Jim Bob controls the lot is not speaking the truth.  It is just a guess.

c) That said, my own quite well researched but still semi- educated guess is that TLC (and other TV shows) does prefer to have families set up a Trust and/or an Inc. and cut a single check.  The Duggar Family does have a Trust. Parents in states not covered by Coogan-type laws can do what they want with the money.  Don't expect the minor children to get a cent.  Also realize that their parents consent to film them.  The minor children have no say in the matter.

d)  But (big BUT) after the minor child turns 18 they must consent themselves to filming.  They may choose to channel their earnings into the family Trust or Inc.  They may perhaps choose to set up a separate contract.

e) Total speculation 1: the Duggar children sign their own contracts (independent of the Duggar Trust) with TLC somewhere between engagement and "leaving and cleaving." 

f) Total speculation 2:  The Duggar engaged and married children also set up independent agreements with TLC approved tabloids like People.  People Magazine does not pay for stories, per se.  People pays a lot for exclusive photographs.

 

Final comment:  As People Magazine now seems thoroughly  disenchanted with Josh Duggar, I wonder how that will affect any (totally speculative on my part) agreements it has with other members of the family.

 

I hope all that stayed within the rules here!

Edited May 25, 2015 by Diffy

[NextIteration]

When you're homeschooled, the only kind of diploma you can get is a GED. Your parents might print something out for you, but it doesn't really mean anything.

 

But, that isn't necessarily true, and it's one more thing that Duggars and ATI and whatever else leaves a shit stain on.  There are accredited ways of doing homeschooling, by curriculum or now by online schools, see: K12 and Connections Academy for example.  But that is a whole other ball of political wax not on topic here, but it is to say that for some kids, especially bright ones with issues or kids that have a serious time-consuming dedicated extracurricular, it can be be a gawd-send alternative to brick and mortar.

 

Just one more thing you can thank the fundaMENTAList movement for.

Edited May 27, 2015 by NextIteration

[GEML]

It is possible to get a high school diploma as a homeschool student in AR, but it requires paying taxes into a different school district and isn't cheap. You follow a different curriculum and take different tests. I have no reason to think, given that Jessa was to take over the schooling "jurisdiction" that the Duggars wouldn't see this as a good investment of money. They had paid for other children's special activities and hobbies. I'm more interested in why Jessa might have chosen it. I suppose, like women a hundred-a hundred and fifty years ago, teaching school got you out of the kitchen.

[Skittl1321]

But, that isn't necessarily true, and it's one more thing that Duggars and ATI and whatever else leaves a shit stain on.  There are accredited ways of doing homeschooling, by curriculum or now by online schools, see: K12 and Connections Academy for example.  But that is a whole other ball of political wax not on topic here, but it is to say that for some kids, especially bright ones with issues or kids that have a serious time-consuming dedicated extracurricular, it can be be a gawd-send alternative to brick and mortar.

Connections Academy is a distance schooling program, not homeschool (at least by Arkansas definition- homeschool is taught primarily by the parent/guardian. Connections has licensed teachers.  I don't know about K12.)

 

So you can get a diploma from that program because it IS a school.

According to the state department of education, Arkansas does not have a homeschool diploma, and you must attend public school for 9 months preceding graduation to be eligible for one. I don't know how Jessa could have one.

Edited May 27, 2015 by Skittl1321

[NextIteration]

Connections and K12 are virtually interchangeable, my point is that they are programs that are done at home, and supervised by someone in the home that is a dedicated "coach".  My comment was not Arkansas specific, it was general, and still there are accredited homeschool curricula that may not be recognized by Arkansas but are by higher education institutions, some are even Christian.

[Kcat1971]

 

 

BECCA3891, ON 27 MAY 2015 - 06:33 AM, SAID:

When you're homeschooled, the only kind of diploma you can get is a GED. Your parents might print something out for you, but it doesn't really mean anything.

 

 

I think my response belongs here.  (Mods: sorry if it should go in small talk)

 

It is NOT true that the only kind of diploma a home educated student can get is a GED.  There are many online accredited private schools that allow parents to educate their child at home and still get an accredited High School diploma.  Many states also have online educational programs that again, allow the child to receive the equivalent of a public high school diploma while doing all of their course work at home.  Finally, even if parents "print something out for you" does not make meaningless.  The majority of colleges and universities recognize homeschooling as a valid method of education.  Many have tabs on their admissions pages that explain the process for admission for home educated students.  Most do not require anything more than a college admissions test score in the range that the school requires, along with a transcript prepared by the parents or student.  

 

Edited due to a typo.

Edited May 27, 2015 by Kcat1971

[Boton]

Speaking as someone who has worked in and consulted with higher education for 20 years, we are definitely in a transition spot when it comes to how colleges look at homeschooling.  Generally, most students who consider themselves "homeschooled" have completed some kind of official curriculum that has gained recognition in their state and so they have a "real diploma."  In that case, they are considered for admission just like any other high school graduate while having had the benefit of their parents' or family's guidance during their studies.

 

For students who do not follow an approved curriculum, there is typically a process that may vary by university to assess their course of study.  Many of these students pursue a GED simply because it makes it easier on them to demonstrate their competency, especially when coupled with tests like the ACT and SAT.  Others may take an alternate approach by taking classes at a local open-access community college and then essentially "applying for transfer" to the competitive university of their choice.

 

Having taught a number of these students over the years, I can say that I believe that there are far more intelligent and well-prepared homeschooled students than there are ones that are completely unprepared.  It appears, judging only from what we've seen on TV, that the Duggars are providing their kids with very little in the way of academic support and encouragement for intellectual development, opting instead to try to tick the boxes of mandatory education without allowing too much "pollution" from the outside culture.  In this, they are doing their kids a disservice, but they should not be thought of as an example of what homeschooling usually is.

[Rhondinella]

Having taught a number of these students over the years, I can say that I believe that there are far more intelligent and well-prepared homeschooled students than there are ones that are completely unprepared.  It appears, judging only from what we've seen on TV, that the Duggars are providing their kids with very little in the way of academic support and encouragement for intellectual development, opting instead to try to tick the boxes of mandatory education without allowing too much "pollution" from the outside culture.  In this, they are doing their kids a disservice, but they should not be thought of as an example of what homeschooling usually is.

 

 

THIS!! I would hate the term "homeschooling" to become synonymous with what the Duggars are doing (or not) with their kids.  I'm not necessarily a proponent myself, but if the person doing the teaching has some kind of college degree at least, then I can live with it if it's done well.  And I know many mothers (with bachelor's and even master's degrees) who homeschool their kids and do a very good job.  I agree that by and large the homeschooled students I've run across have been BETTER prepared in many ways for college than those going to public or private high schools.  People like the Duggars are the exception, I think, not the rule.

[Fuzzysox]

Homefooling can include learning to change diapers! Hey don't knock it because it's a life skill!

 

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/05/theyre-seeing-angels-and-devils-at-work-ex-quiverfull-member-explains-duggar-response-to-sex-abuse/

[Potato511]

hm, I really enjoy this forum and feel like I need it as I detox from being a 19kac viewer right about now, but this thread title makes me feel uncomfortable. It feels like a swipe based on social class and I don't like it. ok, I said my piece. 

[NextIteration]

Since I brought up Connections and K12 - my son did Connections Academy for 18 months which is offered free in our state via a Charter.  Interestingly, the depth offered beyond really good textbooks with wonderful extensions onto the Web was enrichment via PBS, Discovery, National Geographic and a number of other networks - I mean way into their vaults that you can't get at normally.  He didn't take to it very well but when my daughter who is three and a half years older saw the textbooks and looked through the portal she was amazed and wee bit jealous because she could see the depth of it's offering and that you could go deep, wide, far and fast with the curriculum.  It was also really neat because he was doing classes at all different grade levels based on placement testing, most of which was 1-3 grade levels higher than his - can't do that in a brick and mortar usually because of scheduling.

 

Anyway, I wandered back here from the media thread.  If TLC went back to actually being a "Learning Channel" with authentic documentaries and series, could it even do well enough to maintain itself?

 

If this belongs in the closet... sorry, and please move.

[GEML]

I've learned that no matter how you educate your child, someone will criticize how you are doing it. So you simply have to ignore the noise and do the best you can. Whether you homeschool, send your child to public or private school, there is some horrible stereotype that people who want to be negative will insist on telling you is holding your child back. Be of good cheer, and sally forth!

[BitterApple]

If the 3.5 mil figure is accurate that's not a lot of money. Boob and Michelle are still relatively young. They're going to need money for retirement, health insurance etc. If he was dumb enough to blow 250k on a political campaign, you have to wonder what other stupid investments he's made. Even if that 3.5 ended up as an inheritance, when you divide that by 19 that's only around 185k per kid. Subtract estate taxes and executor fees and it's even less. If the Duggar siblings have their own child armies of 10+ kids, that money will be gone in a heartbeat.

Edited May 29, 2015 by BitterApple

[Darknight]

I don't think $3.5 million is much money either, especially for that many people. I am certain that Boob uses money as a form of controlling his kids, like buying houses for them to live in nearby or paying Bin to work for him. I doubt they are free to use money toward anything Boob doesn't approve of, like education for the girls. The idea that he spent a quarter of a million on his campaign while his growing family was crammed into that tiny house sickens me and makes me question his financial acumen. I also think it has been a loooong time since the Duggars have "bought used and saved the difference." Don't get me wrong, they won't be impoverished, but their life will change once TLC is out of the picture.

Yet he complains about his father.

3.5 million plus taxes. Divided by 21 plus grand kids. Plus their lavish lifestyle of mac books, designer clothes, handbags, and a plane. Let's see how long that money lasts

[CarolMK]

I really think that Jim Bob and Michelle are worth more than 3.5 million. Between all the real estate, income from the show, book sales and paid appearance/speaking arrangements, I have a feeling it's closer to a net worth of 10 million. They're set for life even if they never work a day again.  I wish it were possible for the ones 18 and older to sue their parents for a portion of the income from the tv show and leave home on their own terms. It probably won't ever happen though.

[roamyn]

how much you wanna bet that Boob will claim since Josh now has no career expectations, he needs most of their assets now, and the balance goes to the rest of the boys.

[Readalot]

how much you wanna bet that Boob will claim since Josh now has no career expectations, he needs most of their assets now, and the balance goes to the rest of the boys.

unfortunately that sounds about right.

[GEML]

I think $3.5 sounds about right. I never bought into the notion that TLC was handing them thing things left and right. And while they owns lot of real estate holdings, they own it in a part of the country where land and houses are still very cheap and affordable. I think they have burned through a great deal of money the past few years.

[Adiba]

Does anyone know if Jim Bob gets additional $$ from being a " manager" of the children ( for their appearances) ? It just occurred to me that JB could still make money off of his kids ( ala Kris Jenner) even if the series is canceled.

Also, my fear is that if a spin-off is developed with the older daughters, JB would be able to finagle a cut as " manager" or in the form of location fees for using the properties he owns for filming. JB's influence over his daughters could even extend to some coercion over handing over a portion of the show earnings to a family trust in exchange for living on the properties.

[BitterApple]

If JimBob was taking a manager's cut it wouldn't surprise me in the least. As much as I loathe the Kardashians I will give props to Kris in that she's on her hustle and her percentage is probably well deserved. I agree if there was a spin-off Boob would make sure to have his fingers in the pie. The easiest way to do it would be to not sign off on the minor children appearing unless the Duggar LLC was getting a nice fat paycheck in return.

[Darknight]

Does anyone know if Jim Bob gets additional $$ from being a " manager" of the children ( for their appearances) ? It just occurred to me that JB could still make money off of his kids ( ala Kris Jenner) even if the series is canceled.

Also, my fear is that if a spin-off is developed with the older daughters, JB would be able to finagle a cut as " manager" or in the form of location fees for using the properties he owns for filming. JB's influence over his daughters could even extend to some coercion over handing over a portion of the show earnings to a family trust in exchange for living on the properties.

Well he did take money from the girls book