Homeschooling Freedom
Mar 28, 2011
David Mills
The other day I had one of those discussions people who homeschool their children sometimes have, when someone asks about your children, which in America always includes where they go to school. We homeschool our two youngest, and have since kindergarten, with the exception of two years early on at our parochial school. 
The response varies to the news that you do something still considered, even by some conservative Christians, odd, eccentric, and possibly subversive. Some suddenly furrow their brows and purse their lips and declare their concerns about homeschooling, less often about the quality of the education as about the children’s (meaning, in context, our children’s, which is, you know, really rude) “socialization.” I sometimes feel I must surrounded by fascists, such is their apparent concern for making sure our children fit in to the society as it is.
Fewer people respond this way than they used to, or maybe I just don’t meet this kind of person so much anymore. Which is probably a good thing. My wife, who is much more charitable than I am in dealing with annoying people, answers them politely, and tells them about the homeschooling groups to which our children go several days a week and all the other activities they are involved in.
I have so far resisted the temptation to put my hand on their shoulder, look them in the eye, and ask, “Why are you under the delusion that I care what you think?” or to say something shorter and ruder and more, um, declarative. They are, after, being impertinent, and there is something in the self-asserted piety of their alleged concern for my children that really annoys me.
Or maybe they really are just a kind of middle American fascist, whose relation to the full thing is like that of velveeta to real cheese or wonderbread to real bread. But though half-done and tacky to boot, still annoying.
The irony for me is that I first heard of homeschooling as a child growing up in a college town in New England, when the only people who homeschooled their children were hippies living on communes in the country or academics protesting against the regimented and regimenting education “the system” provided for its own purposes. Then, no one blinked at the idea, and indeed it had the kind of romantic appeal such counter-cultural endeavors enjoyed.
And indeed it did seem a reasonable extension of the kind of liberty we were being taught, in the public school, that America had been founded to protect, and to be a rational response to the kind of oppressive tolerance and social control we were taught (this was college town, as I said) the society imposed. If some people wanted to opt out of the system and do things their own way, bully for them. If they wanted to raise their fist against the system, three cheers. Thomas Jefferson, by consensus I think our favorite founding father, would have approved.
Though in my town public education was taken to be the natural order of things, no one, or least no one I can remember, believed it to be the necessary order of things. But maybe they muttered and worried among themselves. In public, at least, the leftist, counter-cultural alternative was generally approved.
So I was surprised some years later to read the kind of people with whom I’d grown up, and others like them, suddenly alarmed at the growth of homeschooling. (And I first read them with such surprise when we still expected to send our children to the public schools.) The critics treated it as a threat to . . . well, exactly what it threatened they rarely made clear, beyond some expressed concern, surely dubious, for the homeschooled children.
The critics found themselves so alarmed, of course, because now politically, culturally, and religiously conservative parents were educating their children at home and rejecting the influence of a system in which the critics—so many of them former counter-cultural types themselves—were heavily invested. And also from which, in many cases, they drew their income. Teachers who explained American history in terms of commercial self-interest were not heard admitting, much less condemning, their own self-interest in maintaining the educational order and the systems of control over others it required.
The homeschoolers were no longer a few hippies and leftists, whose numbers were always going to be small and their influence marginal. Now the homeschoolers were a growing number of average parents, whose counter-cultural commitments were of the conservative and not the leftist sort, whose numbers might well increase and their influence grow strong enough to challenge the public school’s monopoly. (Not to hammer home a point, but the same teachers who railed against monopolies in business were extremely defensive of their own. Even the ones who would privately lament its effects in keeping incompetent colleagues and unnecessary administrators employed.)
Now people who have no obvious stake in the matter, like most of the people I described at the beginning, tend to side with the establishment against the parents. They’ve somehow absorbed the key elements of the ideology, like the concern for “socialization,” which is either a faux concern for the children’s well-being or a real concern for their being educated outside of and probably against the ideas public schools (with exceptions, I realize, as in some communities in the rural Midwest where the public values and the private still coincide) inculcate and impose.
Before someone remarks that some homeschooling parents are very odd or inept or (in a very few cases) dangerous: yes, of course, it is not a perfect system. But that doesn’t answer the question of who should educate the children. And it’s not, most definitely not, an argument for the public school monopoly.
This new criticism is, to someone like me, a very strange reversal. homeschooling is an act of the kind of freedom I was taught our country provided, a freedom of self-determination that was one of its great glories. Even leaving out the idea I was also taught, that removing oneself from the system was a laudable act of counter-cultural liberation, with which I still have some sympathy, to teach one’s children oneself, being able to choose curricula and readings and custom the teaching to every child’s needs and gifts, is the kind of thing I was taught, by teachers of impeccable liberalism, to praise. It is, as it was once understood to be, an expression of liberalism and liberality in public affairs.
Even had we not decided to do the same ourselves, I would still praise it, and condemn its critics, who have betrayed the American vision of freedom and rationalized the extension of social control, often in unadmitted self-interest and in defense of an indefensible monopoly. It can only do our nation good, to have parents so invested in their children’s education, the established social piety of the public schools so concretely challenged, and such freedom not only defended but lived out. But then homeschooled children are far more likely to read, and read closely and at length, America’s founding fathers, and to read them with respect.
David Mills is Deputy Editor of First Things. His previous “On the Square” articles can be found here.
Comments:
3.28.2011 | 10:40am
Mike Melendez says:
David Mills wrote: "Before someone remarks that some home schooling parents are very odd or inept or (in a very few cases) dangerous . . ."
I would think the simple response would be that more than a few public school teachers are odd or inept and (in a very few cases) dangerous. At the least, the parents are involved in their children's education, which, I have always understood, is a key motivator for children.
I do not home school, but I belong to the same American liberal mindset that said home schooling was a reasonable and good exercise of our freedoms. That mindset is no longer mainstream. We're far more concerned, these days, with ensuring one group's "civil rights" by taking away the civil rights of another group.
I would think the simple response would be that more than a few public school teachers are odd or inept and (in a very few cases) dangerous. At the least, the parents are involved in their children's education, which, I have always understood, is a key motivator for children.
I do not home school, but I belong to the same American liberal mindset that said home schooling was a reasonable and good exercise of our freedoms. That mindset is no longer mainstream. We're far more concerned, these days, with ensuring one group's "civil rights" by taking away the civil rights of another group.
3.28.2011 | 10:59am
Dennis Murphy says:
Our three homeschooled children are now adults, the youngest still in college. The concern you mentioned about "socialization" was probably the first and most frequent objection mentioned to us also. There were never specific ideas behind it, only the general assumption that a child would become in some way less socially capable or even dysfunctional compared to children educated in the public schools.
Eventually, I learned to respond immediately that "socialization" was actually better in home schooling, because the children interacted with adults much more often, and the public school's "socialization" was primarily the child learning to cope with the pecking order of large groups of children. That seemed to satisfy or at least silence the expressed concern.
Eventually, I learned to respond immediately that "socialization" was actually better in home schooling, because the children interacted with adults much more often, and the public school's "socialization" was primarily the child learning to cope with the pecking order of large groups of children. That seemed to satisfy or at least silence the expressed concern.
3.28.2011 | 11:12am
Bop says:
No, no, no. You see a parent is a parent and a teacher is a teacher and the two should not meet. Just as a parent should not try to be like a “friend” to their child, neither should the parent presume to think that he is good enough to fulfill both roles at the same time to the same child. It is a question of dimension, roundedness, natural appropriateness. Fathers should be men and mothers should be women. Any admixture, such as two men raising children as parents, is a lessening, a debasing, a failure in recognition and attunement. Most people recognize this although they are not able to articulate why it should be so. It is no surprise that hippies and a certain class of academic should be the types who trailblazed this error. It betrays a half-baked arrogance and flaunting of solidly established community values. And of course one knows that homeschooling has nothing to do with the children really and everything to do with the parents and how they see themselves.
3.28.2011 | 11:13am
The Sanity Inspector says:
When I'm looking through a stack of applications for a part-time job, I always put the home-schooled teens in the short list pile.
3.28.2011 | 11:29am
Philly Homeschooler says:
Funny, but of all the reasons we have chosen homeschooling, "socialization" rises to the top of the list for me. That is, we homeschool not in spite of "socialization" concerns, but in part because of them. Kids in the Christian homeschool co-op to which we belong are not little angels -- there is no such place as utopia -- but there is a shared set of morals and ethics among the parents, and that creates a healthy social order among the kids. My children are being socialized according to virtues that are much more difficult to find sustained in public schools -- not because public schools are bad per se, but because they cannot help but reflect the values of the public. As Caitlin Flanagan wrote in The Atlantic a few years ago:
As a parent, I am horrified by the changes that have taken place in the common culture over the past thirty years. I believe that we are raising children in a kind of post-apocalyptic landscape in which no forces beyond individual households—individual mothers and fathers—are protecting children from pornography and violent entertainment. The "it takes a village" philosophy is a joke, because the village is now so polluted and so desolate of commonly held, child-appropriate moral values that my job as a mother is not to rely on the village but to protect my children from it.
As a parent, I am horrified by the changes that have taken place in the common culture over the past thirty years. I believe that we are raising children in a kind of post-apocalyptic landscape in which no forces beyond individual households—individual mothers and fathers—are protecting children from pornography and violent entertainment. The "it takes a village" philosophy is a joke, because the village is now so polluted and so desolate of commonly held, child-appropriate moral values that my job as a mother is not to rely on the village but to protect my children from it.
3.28.2011 | 11:53am
adam says:
@BOP
You have the right idea but you are misdirected against homeschool. It is precisly because of those things that you mentioned that more parents should 'consider' homeschooling. Parents need to take the responsibilty of their child's education more seriously and stop passing the buck on to a public school system that, more often than not, sees your child as a number..You want your children to grow up and be responsible adults and to mature properly. One of the dangers of public school is that you are sending your children to learn to be "social" from a bunch of immature children (aka teenagers). Do you want your children to learn how to be a man from the teenager in his algebra class that sleeps all day, comes to school high, and has a child out of wedlock before he graduates? now, obviously all of these are the extreme but look into the statistics of the "teenager" today. THe majority is becoming like that and i, for one, dont want my children learning to be a responsible adult from other irresponsible children.
You have the right idea but you are misdirected against homeschool. It is precisly because of those things that you mentioned that more parents should 'consider' homeschooling. Parents need to take the responsibilty of their child's education more seriously and stop passing the buck on to a public school system that, more often than not, sees your child as a number..You want your children to grow up and be responsible adults and to mature properly. One of the dangers of public school is that you are sending your children to learn to be "social" from a bunch of immature children (aka teenagers). Do you want your children to learn how to be a man from the teenager in his algebra class that sleeps all day, comes to school high, and has a child out of wedlock before he graduates? now, obviously all of these are the extreme but look into the statistics of the "teenager" today. THe majority is becoming like that and i, for one, dont want my children learning to be a responsible adult from other irresponsible children.
3.28.2011 | 11:54am
Matt says:
Bop wrote: "No, no, no. You see a parent is a parent and a teacher is a teacher and the two should not meet. . . . It is a question of . . . natural appropriateness."
Obviously, it's only "natural" for teachers and parents to be separate entities--because clearly, nature provided a class of professional teachers so that children can learn from their parents, right? Oh wait, no--that's only happened in the last 100 years. How unenlightened all those savages must have been before we discovered that it is "natural" not to be taught by your parents.
Seriously, you've got to be careful with these arguments from "nature." There is no "natural" educational arrangement--they are all constructed by human beings. And just as there have been many people who needed NOT to be taught by their parents, many have thrived in such a system--not just in recent years, but through the centuries. In other words, you look to me as if you're taking a system created by a specific American place and time to be somehow universally "natural." That's a problem.
(If you were being ironic, please forgive me--and remember the Internet is not good to irony. As I may have proved by my own feeble stab at it.)
Obviously, it's only "natural" for teachers and parents to be separate entities--because clearly, nature provided a class of professional teachers so that children can learn from their parents, right? Oh wait, no--that's only happened in the last 100 years. How unenlightened all those savages must have been before we discovered that it is "natural" not to be taught by your parents.
Seriously, you've got to be careful with these arguments from "nature." There is no "natural" educational arrangement--they are all constructed by human beings. And just as there have been many people who needed NOT to be taught by their parents, many have thrived in such a system--not just in recent years, but through the centuries. In other words, you look to me as if you're taking a system created by a specific American place and time to be somehow universally "natural." That's a problem.
(If you were being ironic, please forgive me--and remember the Internet is not good to irony. As I may have proved by my own feeble stab at it.)
3.28.2011 | 11:58am
Willard says:
Aside from 1) socialization, there are a couple of other possible major problems with home schooling.
One of them is: 2) home schooled students are far more vulnerable to familial abuse.
Another problem is that 3) "home schooling" often becomes an excuse for kids to stop going to school, and not doing anything at home either. I have personally discovered several such cases. Where the parents claimed to be "home schooling" their children. But they had never registered them, and never really undertook any real schooling at all.
These severe problems with home schooling, often never appear in the statistics; because they are exceedingly hard to track.
One of them is: 2) home schooled students are far more vulnerable to familial abuse.
Another problem is that 3) "home schooling" often becomes an excuse for kids to stop going to school, and not doing anything at home either. I have personally discovered several such cases. Where the parents claimed to be "home schooling" their children. But they had never registered them, and never really undertook any real schooling at all.
These severe problems with home schooling, often never appear in the statistics; because they are exceedingly hard to track.
3.28.2011 | 12:05pm
Arthur Sido says:
We have noticed the same thing. Apparently saying you homeschool your kids is granting a license to question your fitness as a parent in a way that almost nothing else compares. I expect this sort of response from unbelievers but it is troubling that people who profess to be Christians respond in much the same way.
3.28.2011 | 12:06pm
Bobby Winters says:
I have close friends who home school She had taught in the public schools of a large southwestern city and decided it wasn't for them. There was the alternative of a Catholic school (they are Roman Catholic) but that was not used as the school was perceived as being dominated by the rich. I do confess that my wife and I did ask them about socialization. This was not because we doubted the children would be socialized, but we were curious how that would happen. On our part, I do not believe this was out of rudeness as much as curiousity. My memories of school are not entirely filled with things learned in the classroom, but games played in the field. I think that it is simply natural for those ignorant of homeschooling to ask these questions. How else will we learn?
3.28.2011 | 12:06pm
David Poecking says:
When I was a teacher, mostly in a summer supplementary program for gifted science & math students, I sampled a wide range of homeschooled, privately schooled, and publicly schooled students. I once had a homeschooler who might be said to be poorly socialized, but then again I could scarcely count all the publicly schooled youth who might be so described. If one insists on correlating schooling with socialization, I'd guess the homeschoolers have a better ratio of well to poorly socialized.
There are plausible reasons for believing homeschooling makes for better socialization. For example, that a majority of children should go to school is a relatively recent development in human history: A strictly socio-evolutionary anthropology ought to concede that humans are very likely hard-wired less for cohort-oriented socialization and more for intergenerational socialization. My anecdotal experience with the homeschooled is that they demonstrate a more connatural eagerness for the acquisition of adult roles and responsibilities. Not surprisingly, the greater motivation is rewarded by greater achievement. To be fair, one ought to control for similar levels of motivation among their parents, but it seems reasonable to allow room for some causation.
There are plausible reasons for believing homeschooling makes for better socialization. For example, that a majority of children should go to school is a relatively recent development in human history: A strictly socio-evolutionary anthropology ought to concede that humans are very likely hard-wired less for cohort-oriented socialization and more for intergenerational socialization. My anecdotal experience with the homeschooled is that they demonstrate a more connatural eagerness for the acquisition of adult roles and responsibilities. Not surprisingly, the greater motivation is rewarded by greater achievement. To be fair, one ought to control for similar levels of motivation among their parents, but it seems reasonable to allow room for some causation.
3.28.2011 | 12:08pm
elohimito says:
@Bop - You're comparing a parent teaching their kids math and science to a homosexual couple raising a kid?
3.28.2011 | 12:14pm
Eyeball says:
I know that for at least one of my children and me, homeschooling would mean an endless personality clash. My husband and I are very clear that we are the primary educators of our children, but this is not the same as believing that we have to be the people who teach them their multiplication tables. I therefore agree with some of Bop's point, in that I think the best thing for children would be a good school, full of the children of like-minded people, with moral, competent, patient teachers other than their own parents. Homeschooling is an option which I feel should always be legal, but parents should use prudence in deciding whether theirs is an area in which available schools are so unsatisfactory that home schooling is necessary.
3.28.2011 | 12:19pm
Catherine says:
Bop, you're comment does not take into account that the parents are their children's first teacher. There is no reason why that relationship should arbitrarily end just because a child reaches the age of five. If "community values" are sub-standard or contrary to parental values then sending a child to a public school requires a parent to daily "undo" what the child is taught.
If public schools had simply stuck to teaching academic subjects and not indoctrinating children with extreme social values there would be far fewer children being home-schooled. Given the limited school day, time spent teaching "social" subjects would be put to better use on academic subjects, thus ensuring that our children excel rather than fall so far short compared to other developed nations.
If public schools had simply stuck to teaching academic subjects and not indoctrinating children with extreme social values there would be far fewer children being home-schooled. Given the limited school day, time spent teaching "social" subjects would be put to better use on academic subjects, thus ensuring that our children excel rather than fall so far short compared to other developed nations.
3.28.2011 | 12:22pm
Steve Martin says:
The biggest mistake I made was to let my children go to public schools. They were taught what to think, not how to think.
3.28.2011 | 12:27pm
David Mills says:
*Willard*: And public school students are far more vulnerable to abuse from teachers and others, and the statistics on this are not encouraging. This is to leave out entirely the intellectual abuse they're likely to suffer as a matter of course in many schools.
And many public schools students are hardly like to study either. They're just warehoused for eight hours a day.
Of all criticisms to be made of home-schooling, these are two of the most pointless.
*Bobby*: You were asking a genuine question, but no one who ever asked me that question was. I could tell not just bec. of the way they asked the question but bec. of the lecture that usually followed.
And many public schools students are hardly like to study either. They're just warehoused for eight hours a day.
Of all criticisms to be made of home-schooling, these are two of the most pointless.
*Bobby*: You were asking a genuine question, but no one who ever asked me that question was. I could tell not just bec. of the way they asked the question but bec. of the lecture that usually followed.
3.28.2011 | 12:42pm
mtm says:
I have found in reading comments posted in the NYTimes, for example, an underlying hostility to homeschooling because it keeps bright, engaged children away from mingling with the masses. In this, the critics are similar to those who oppose charter schools and vouchers. They get very mad when you, who presumably have well balanced, motivated children, don't share your good fortune with other, lesser students. Time and again, the charge leveled of " no proper socialization" is a code that means "how dare you take the time and resources to get your kid out of a mediocre situation, when the rest of us don't want to make THAT much effort."
Or- "What's good for your kids is good for ours, so if you have time to volunteer, don't just teach your kids, come to the schools and teach ours too." As if a homeschooling parent owes the whole community the commitment they give their own children. A typical liberal response.
Or- "What's good for your kids is good for ours, so if you have time to volunteer, don't just teach your kids, come to the schools and teach ours too." As if a homeschooling parent owes the whole community the commitment they give their own children. A typical liberal response.
3.28.2011 | 12:42pm
Paul F says:
Socialization? When was the last time I found myself in a room with 30 other people exactly the same age as me and from exactly the same socio-economic background as me, where the "socialization" "skills" I learned in school would have come in handy? Why, it was the last day of my senior year of high school. Thanks, school!!
3.28.2011 | 1:05pm
jason taylor says:
What socialization? How do you have "socialization" when talking or passing notes in class is forbidden?
3.28.2011 | 1:05pm
Heather says:
I am a homeschooling mom and as far as the socialization aspect of it, this is certianly a very highly questioned "concern". I have seen kids in the public school system who have no idea how to talk to others or join a crowd. It has nothing to do with schooling but the childs personality. The parent is a great influence on the socialization of any child, public, private, or parochial school. The parent leads by example. If the parent doesn't socialize or introduce the child to such situations most likely the child will be reserved. The personalities we each have is not a LEARNED behavior. It is a born trait. The more we enhance that trait the more it is noticed by others. It is important for homeschoolers to be around other homeschoolers. For the most part a homeschool group will have very similar goals and values and those are certainly shown and passed among the children of said group. Teachers at a any school don't have the capability of hearing everything every child says or seeing all they do. A teacher at a public school is NOT allowed to discipline a child in any fashion other than a detention type of consequence. That doesnt' teach the child anything but getting to stay away from home longer where the situation at home could be good or bad, but regardless allows that child to still spew more of it's bad behavior on others. A parent can be a great teacher. After all is a parent not a teacher from the moment they give birth? Do we as parents whether mom or dad not teach our children to walk, talk, eat, play, etc. Why then do we not have ppl to come to our homes and "teach" these things to our infants, if as parents we can't be a teacher?? There is no manual for being a parent, there is a manual for being a teacher. A parent has to go by instinct and experience, much like a teacher who doesn't have a "text book" that gives an answer to every question, situation, or concern that may come up. Each classroom is different as is each teacher. Some parents can not and should not mix the two, others do a remarkable job at it. To judge one for their own decisions without walking in their shoes or experiencing their routines only makes me think of the verse in the Bible of taking the plank out of your own eye. No we aren't perfect and we do make mistakes. The biggest advantage to homeschooling is the flexibility as well as opportunity. Who knows my child better than I? Who knows their buttons for good and bad behavior better than I? WHo knows their learning style and can teach by that style alone? Who knows their personality or personal goals and can help or wants to help them suceed in EVERYTHING they do??? The childs parents!!! That makes a parent a Great Teacher!
3.28.2011 | 1:05pm
Fred says:
I could be wrong (print doesn't reveal tone of voice, facial expression, or other elements of non-verbal communication), but based on his past comments and the ludicrousness of his suggestions, I believe Bop was writing ironical. I think he meant to suggest that condemning same sex parenthood is equivalent to condemning home schooling. Why, other than shock value or trollishness, he would indulge in that non-sequitor is quite beyond me, and, as I said, I could be wrong. But Bop, if I'm right and you have a point to make about home schooling, please make it a bit more straightforwardly. If your point is about same sex parenting, please save that for a thread more appropriate to it.
3.28.2011 | 1:12pm
Phoebe says:
The concern for socialization IS a legitimate issue and not one that should be brushed over with cliches. I was homeschooled all the way through, and that is the one thing I regret, to this day. Interacting with only one's parents does NOT make a child more capable of interacting with adults. What it does do is limit one's understanding of people to whatever one's parents are like. Children need to learn to talk to adults, other than parents and grandparents, and to build friendships with children besides their siblings. I am now in my late 20s, and it has taken years to develop the ability to read people, build healthy relationships, and interact as an equal. I am amazed at some of the public schooled young people in my church and their ability to interact with both adults and youth, while even today, many of the homeschooled youth I know still struggle.
Does this mean people should not homeschool? Of course not. There are pros and cons to every educational system, and there are many wonderful benefits to homeschooling. It does mean that the concern for socialization should not be simply dismissed with cliches or treated as rude.
Does this mean people should not homeschool? Of course not. There are pros and cons to every educational system, and there are many wonderful benefits to homeschooling. It does mean that the concern for socialization should not be simply dismissed with cliches or treated as rude.
3.28.2011 | 1:34pm
David Mills is right on in his suggestion that public schooling is much more about socialization than it is about schooling. This is by design, and has been the case since its very inception a bit over 100 years ago. To a very considerable extent, in fact, actual learning is discouraged as being inimical to the primary goal of a certain specific kind of socialization.
I highly recommend that anyone interested in this topic read John Taylor Gatto's AN UNDERGROUND HISTORY OF EDUCATION. The book is imperfect, but nevertheless quite an eye-opener about the conscious program of socialization that constitutes the real reason for compulsory public schooling. It is available in its entirety at www.johntaylorgatto.com. Gatto himself is an award-winning former public school teacher.
Kudos to all home schooling parents who go to the trouble of trying to avoid this for their children.
I highly recommend that anyone interested in this topic read John Taylor Gatto's AN UNDERGROUND HISTORY OF EDUCATION. The book is imperfect, but nevertheless quite an eye-opener about the conscious program of socialization that constitutes the real reason for compulsory public schooling. It is available in its entirety at www.johntaylorgatto.com. Gatto himself is an award-winning former public school teacher.
Kudos to all home schooling parents who go to the trouble of trying to avoid this for their children.
3.28.2011 | 1:49pm
Le says:
I homeschooled my son from the time he was born until he was 18. Contrary to the flutters mentioned by some of the above persons, he was never abused by either me or my husband. We not only taught him, we always treated him as a human being, with respect. We were constantly submitted to the subtle threat that he could be taken away from us at any time.
He was tested regularly by the local public school fascists, and for a while, his math scores were low. When I asked him about it, he told me that the person testing him made him do everything in his head, including multiplication and long division (try multiplying 487 by 95 in your head and see how well you do, and under a time restraint). I'm surprised he did was well as he did. The next time he was tested, I insisted on being present and surprise, when he was 12 he was functioning on a college level in ALL subjects, even math. It still makes me angry that they were manipulating a small child (this first happened when he was 7) for such a banal reason.
The only reason for compulsory education is to produce willing serfs.
He was tested regularly by the local public school fascists, and for a while, his math scores were low. When I asked him about it, he told me that the person testing him made him do everything in his head, including multiplication and long division (try multiplying 487 by 95 in your head and see how well you do, and under a time restraint). I'm surprised he did was well as he did. The next time he was tested, I insisted on being present and surprise, when he was 12 he was functioning on a college level in ALL subjects, even math. It still makes me angry that they were manipulating a small child (this first happened when he was 7) for such a banal reason.
The only reason for compulsory education is to produce willing serfs.
3.28.2011 | 2:16pm
Fran Presley says:
People who are sold on the public school system should read Dr. Anthony Esolen's latest book: Ten Ways to Destroy the Imagination of Your Child.
3.28.2011 | 2:24pm
Tony Esolen says:
I have been an officer in our state homeschooling organization -- actually, in two such -- for fourteen years, and have met literally hundreds of homeschooled children, and have also watched them grow up, go to college, get good jobs, get married, and have families. You will always find bad people in any group, but my experience overwhelmingly testifies to the down-to-earth healthiness of home schooling. In no particular order:
1. The homeschoolers we know are CONSTANTLY in company with the children of other families, and with their parents. When I was a kid, attending our local parochial school in Pennsylvania, I never got to know the parents of any of the other students, partly because I was shy, but mostly because the parents themselves never socialized with one another. I also did not get to know whole families, not really -- because of course we were always segregated by age. My daughter, homeschooled all the way through, knows literally scores of adults -- and multiply that number several times over for their children -- whom she first met when she was a little girl, with whom she shares many memories, and with whom she can have friendly conversations.
2. It is a healthy thing for children to be around people of various ages, as homeschoolers are, constantly. The older children help to take care of the younger, while the younger emulate the older; and if they are taught within earshot of one another, the older children "eavesdrop" on material to review, while the younger "eavesdrop" on material they will one day study in earnest. That is the sort of thing that used to happen in one-room schoolhouses, and it is entirely healthy. But I see schooled children, even if only two or three years apart, moving away from one another, because the time they spend in one another's company is severely and artificially curtailed.
3. Whenever I meet a college freshman -- and I have met thousands of them -- who looks me in the eye, smiles, seems perfectly comfortable in his skin, and laughs at my jokes -- who does not have that hunted, sullen, wary look, a "scorched" look as I call it -- my immediate guess is that the kid was either homeschooled, or that the kid attended a single-sex high school, or both. I am usually right in these guesses. The homeschooled kids stand out.
4. College admissions departments know this, and now seek homeschoolers out.
5. If you want to meet joyful and phenomenally smart young people, visit the homeschooler-founded Patrick Henry College in Purcellville, Virginia. I have visited, twice, to give lectures there. The first time I visited, I was absolutely astonished. I began my talk at 8 PM, to about sixty evangelical Christian students, all homeschooled (the whole student body would have been in attendance, but the others were rehearsing a play). The talk was on medieval Corpus Christi plays, and the limits to which real cultural change can be effected by legal policy. I finished the talk shortly before 9 PM. The questions which those students then asked me were superior, and by no slight margin, to those that I have received elsewhere, at Princeton for instance, from FACULTY in attendance -- at Princeton twice, and at the thirty other schools where I've spoken in recent years. I was asked about the theology of Alexander Schmemann, about the mysticism of Jean-Francois de la Caussade, about the paintings of a certain artist of the grotesque whose name I have forgotten, and on and on -- for almost three hours. We did not leave the building until just before midnight.
6. The US made a colossal mistake in consolidating school districts in the 1960's, cutting the heart out of a real civic life in most small towns, and consigning children to immense warehouses, where I am sure it is not natural for human beings to thrive.
7. I am sure that if I had been schooled at home, I would have learned calculus by age 12. Schools are -- they cannot help but be -- bad for kids who deviate in important ways from the mean. Good friends of ours have an eight year old son, the seventh of seven children, who is already studying philosophy, and this is NOT because they are pushing it on him, but simply because he has overheard what his older siblings have been doing.
8. My wife has been instrumental in "saving" many a child from the desperation occasioned by bad schools. What we tell the parents is borne out by experience: You will have your child back. Often the recovery is as quick as if you'd taken a person out of poisonous air into the clear outdoors.
9. Boys benefit especially.
10. Science, naturally, is the hardest subject to deal with, because homes aren't equipped with laboratories. But at home it's far easier to deal with other subjects -- languages, for instance, or literature, or history..
11. It is instructive to note that opponents of homeschooling -- who are mainly secular these days -- no longer argue that the kids don't get a fine education. Homeschoolers perform at more than a standard deviation above the government school mean. Nor do they any longer argue that the kids aren't socialized. Homeschoolers are not prone to drug abuse, early pregnancy, crime, depression, ADHD, and so forth. So now they argue that it should be done away with because it is "separatist," by which they mean that the kids are insufficiently secularized.
1. The homeschoolers we know are CONSTANTLY in company with the children of other families, and with their parents. When I was a kid, attending our local parochial school in Pennsylvania, I never got to know the parents of any of the other students, partly because I was shy, but mostly because the parents themselves never socialized with one another. I also did not get to know whole families, not really -- because of course we were always segregated by age. My daughter, homeschooled all the way through, knows literally scores of adults -- and multiply that number several times over for their children -- whom she first met when she was a little girl, with whom she shares many memories, and with whom she can have friendly conversations.
2. It is a healthy thing for children to be around people of various ages, as homeschoolers are, constantly. The older children help to take care of the younger, while the younger emulate the older; and if they are taught within earshot of one another, the older children "eavesdrop" on material to review, while the younger "eavesdrop" on material they will one day study in earnest. That is the sort of thing that used to happen in one-room schoolhouses, and it is entirely healthy. But I see schooled children, even if only two or three years apart, moving away from one another, because the time they spend in one another's company is severely and artificially curtailed.
3. Whenever I meet a college freshman -- and I have met thousands of them -- who looks me in the eye, smiles, seems perfectly comfortable in his skin, and laughs at my jokes -- who does not have that hunted, sullen, wary look, a "scorched" look as I call it -- my immediate guess is that the kid was either homeschooled, or that the kid attended a single-sex high school, or both. I am usually right in these guesses. The homeschooled kids stand out.
4. College admissions departments know this, and now seek homeschoolers out.
5. If you want to meet joyful and phenomenally smart young people, visit the homeschooler-founded Patrick Henry College in Purcellville, Virginia. I have visited, twice, to give lectures there. The first time I visited, I was absolutely astonished. I began my talk at 8 PM, to about sixty evangelical Christian students, all homeschooled (the whole student body would have been in attendance, but the others were rehearsing a play). The talk was on medieval Corpus Christi plays, and the limits to which real cultural change can be effected by legal policy. I finished the talk shortly before 9 PM. The questions which those students then asked me were superior, and by no slight margin, to those that I have received elsewhere, at Princeton for instance, from FACULTY in attendance -- at Princeton twice, and at the thirty other schools where I've spoken in recent years. I was asked about the theology of Alexander Schmemann, about the mysticism of Jean-Francois de la Caussade, about the paintings of a certain artist of the grotesque whose name I have forgotten, and on and on -- for almost three hours. We did not leave the building until just before midnight.
6. The US made a colossal mistake in consolidating school districts in the 1960's, cutting the heart out of a real civic life in most small towns, and consigning children to immense warehouses, where I am sure it is not natural for human beings to thrive.
7. I am sure that if I had been schooled at home, I would have learned calculus by age 12. Schools are -- they cannot help but be -- bad for kids who deviate in important ways from the mean. Good friends of ours have an eight year old son, the seventh of seven children, who is already studying philosophy, and this is NOT because they are pushing it on him, but simply because he has overheard what his older siblings have been doing.
8. My wife has been instrumental in "saving" many a child from the desperation occasioned by bad schools. What we tell the parents is borne out by experience: You will have your child back. Often the recovery is as quick as if you'd taken a person out of poisonous air into the clear outdoors.
9. Boys benefit especially.
10. Science, naturally, is the hardest subject to deal with, because homes aren't equipped with laboratories. But at home it's far easier to deal with other subjects -- languages, for instance, or literature, or history..
11. It is instructive to note that opponents of homeschooling -- who are mainly secular these days -- no longer argue that the kids don't get a fine education. Homeschoolers perform at more than a standard deviation above the government school mean. Nor do they any longer argue that the kids aren't socialized. Homeschoolers are not prone to drug abuse, early pregnancy, crime, depression, ADHD, and so forth. So now they argue that it should be done away with because it is "separatist," by which they mean that the kids are insufficiently secularized.
3.28.2011 | 2:29pm
annie says:
I enjoy the experience of my children in public schools a great deal. It has been an opportunity for me to get to know (and work with) parents in the community from many different backgrounds. We look out for each other's children and take pride in thier accomplishments. Our kids interact with home schooled and private school kids throughch youth groups, sports, etc. Where the children are taught is not a big deal for the kids
3.28.2011 | 2:40pm
Barbara says:
OK, folks: bop is generally not in agreement with a conservative, religious outlook. Just so you know: the sarcasm doesn't come across very well.
I took my kids out of middle school to homeschool them, with mixed success. To be fair, my son's health problems really interfered with his schooling, but the middle school social millieu was also interfering with his schooling. My daughter, on the other hand, went from a tense and highly emotional social environment to the calm of home and a vibrant "after school" activities group. Anyone who thinks that middle school is a good "socialization" experience is on drugs, and not the good kind. I know people my age who are still "in recovery" from being subjected to forced interaction with hundreds of tweens for 3 years.
I took my kids out of middle school to homeschool them, with mixed success. To be fair, my son's health problems really interfered with his schooling, but the middle school social millieu was also interfering with his schooling. My daughter, on the other hand, went from a tense and highly emotional social environment to the calm of home and a vibrant "after school" activities group. Anyone who thinks that middle school is a good "socialization" experience is on drugs, and not the good kind. I know people my age who are still "in recovery" from being subjected to forced interaction with hundreds of tweens for 3 years.
3.28.2011 | 3:07pm
DBP says:
Like the rudely critical questions aimed at parents with "too many" children, I interpret at least some of this reflexive incredulity toward homeschooling as an internal "I couldn't do that" expressed through "so neither should you."
3.28.2011 | 3:21pm
Arby says:
No matter how many times we hear that US schools are dropping in the rankings of schools world-wide, we hear homeschooling critics insist that all children should attend public school. No matter how many stories we hear about middle school and high school students distributing nude photos of girls via cell phones and school laptop computers, we hear public educators raise concerns that home schooled children are not properly “socialized.” It does not matter how many teachers make the World Net Daily list of sexual predators who have raped students, opponents of homeschooling seem more concerned about what happens within the walls of a home school than what happens within the walls of our nation’s public schools. Inherent in the desire to shine light into the houses where homeschoolers reside is the belief that there is something evil that must be exposed. In short, no matter how poorly public schools perform, supporters continue to believe that those public schools are head and shoulders above any other choice. Homeschoolers rightly reject that notion.
Why do so many people criticize homeschoolers even after test scores clearly demonstrate that homes educated students score better on standardized tests? Who do so many people criticize homeschooling over unproven fears about all those children being abused under the guise of homeschooling? Parents who see the failing state of public education yet place their children in that system anyway see a homeschooler’s rejection of public education as a judgment of their values. Parents who see instances of sexual abuse in their schools and still choose to send their children to those schools see a homeschooler’s rejection of that option as a judgment of their parenting. The public school teacher who hears home educators say, “No thank you, we can do it better at home,” hears a rejection of his or her professional competence. And what makes that rejection even more offensive to the teacher is that it comes from individuals whom they consider grossly unqualified—parents who are not tested, not certified, and not licensed by the state. The success of homeschooling is a mirror which reflects the state of public education to the greater community. It is no wonder that so many people want to break the mirror. It is easier to ignore a problem than to turn an introspective eye and correct what needs to be corrected.
Why do so many people criticize homeschoolers even after test scores clearly demonstrate that homes educated students score better on standardized tests? Who do so many people criticize homeschooling over unproven fears about all those children being abused under the guise of homeschooling? Parents who see the failing state of public education yet place their children in that system anyway see a homeschooler’s rejection of public education as a judgment of their values. Parents who see instances of sexual abuse in their schools and still choose to send their children to those schools see a homeschooler’s rejection of that option as a judgment of their parenting. The public school teacher who hears home educators say, “No thank you, we can do it better at home,” hears a rejection of his or her professional competence. And what makes that rejection even more offensive to the teacher is that it comes from individuals whom they consider grossly unqualified—parents who are not tested, not certified, and not licensed by the state. The success of homeschooling is a mirror which reflects the state of public education to the greater community. It is no wonder that so many people want to break the mirror. It is easier to ignore a problem than to turn an introspective eye and correct what needs to be corrected.
3.28.2011 | 3:23pm
Dad says:
Through a series of events which I could never have foreseen when I was younger, I've become the teaching parent of our two home schooled boys. I've been doing it for over ten years. Now...that's being an outcast! I've never even heard of, much less met another home schooling Dad. The play dates were interesting when the boys were young...I spent a lot of time staring at my feet while all the moms traded stories. I don't regret it, though.
Through studying, working, playing, fighting, and living together we've all come a ways. Home schooling is excellent for boys, especially. Home schooling gives a parent the freedom to teach them what it means to be a man in world hostile to the very idea. It isn't for everyone, but it's certainly a terrific option.
Not to mention the blessing of never being subjected to anything by Maya Angelou.
Through studying, working, playing, fighting, and living together we've all come a ways. Home schooling is excellent for boys, especially. Home schooling gives a parent the freedom to teach them what it means to be a man in world hostile to the very idea. It isn't for everyone, but it's certainly a terrific option.
Not to mention the blessing of never being subjected to anything by Maya Angelou.
3.28.2011 | 3:37pm
Mike Melendez says:
Willard says: "These severe problems with home schooling, often never appear in the statistics; because they are exceedingly hard to track."
Then how do we know that they are severe, moderate, minor, or even greater than the same problems in public schools? This is a curious logical statement that makes a claim and then pulls out any possible support for it. But I do like the construction "often never".
Then how do we know that they are severe, moderate, minor, or even greater than the same problems in public schools? This is a curious logical statement that makes a claim and then pulls out any possible support for it. But I do like the construction "often never".
3.28.2011 | 3:54pm
Ethan C. says:
Phoebe, I also was homeschooled, and I agree with you to a certain extent. However, I think it's important not to over-generalize from one's own experience.
My two brothers and I were homeschooled through about 7th grade, and after that we started attending public middle and high schools. Each of us struggled with that social change in our own ways. One of my brothers had a whole lot of problems from it, and the other did a lot better. A lot of the difference was due to their personalities, and also to the specific public schools that they went into.
For myself, I did pretty well, though sometimes I wish that I could have been homeschooled all the way through, or else maybe gone to high school part time like my wife did (she *loved* both her homeschool and public school experiences).
I think the biggest problem I have with those who criticize homeschooling-in-general is that there really is no such thing as the typical, standard homeschooling experience. The success of homeschooling depends a lot on the personality of the particular student and the state of the particular family.
There are some legitimate generalizations one can make, but we need to be careful that those don't expand into overgeneralizations. Especially for a movement that specifically reacts to the over-standardization of schooling in the public system.
My two brothers and I were homeschooled through about 7th grade, and after that we started attending public middle and high schools. Each of us struggled with that social change in our own ways. One of my brothers had a whole lot of problems from it, and the other did a lot better. A lot of the difference was due to their personalities, and also to the specific public schools that they went into.
For myself, I did pretty well, though sometimes I wish that I could have been homeschooled all the way through, or else maybe gone to high school part time like my wife did (she *loved* both her homeschool and public school experiences).
I think the biggest problem I have with those who criticize homeschooling-in-general is that there really is no such thing as the typical, standard homeschooling experience. The success of homeschooling depends a lot on the personality of the particular student and the state of the particular family.
There are some legitimate generalizations one can make, but we need to be careful that those don't expand into overgeneralizations. Especially for a movement that specifically reacts to the over-standardization of schooling in the public system.
3.28.2011 | 4:08pm
Judy K. Warner says:
I'm coming to the discussion late, and almost everything I would have said has been said. I want to add that many children have great interests or passions in things that either are not covered in school at all, or are just lightly passed over. Home schooling gives them the opportunity to go all out in pursuing their interests. For instance, in fourth grade in public school I loved a social studies unit on how colonial Americans lived. It was over in a couple of weeks. My daughter developed the same interest, but as a home schooler she spent years on that "unit." She read books, cut out paper dolls, made candles, organized an overnight role-playing history week with her friends (it lasted two days), volunteered at a history museum and day camp, joined a Rev War reenactment group as the only young person, became an expert on clothing and household items of the colonial era, learned to cook in a fireplace, and a lot of other things I can't remember at this distance. Most home schooling parents probably have similar stories about their children's interests.
3.28.2011 | 5:08pm
Ethan C. says:
That's true, Judy. Of course, on the other hand, without public school I probably never would have been able to study Latin, or do nearly as much with Speech and Debate (though in recent years the local homeschool Speech and Debate organization has grown tremendously), both of which were some of the most rewarding parts of my education. However, in my case, it was the outstanding foundation that I got from homeschooling that allowed me to get so much from my later public school experience.
Now, with the Internet it's now ridiculously easy for homeschool students to find almost anything they need to pursue their special interests. When I was in school it was back in the old dial-up days, when things didn't work half the time. About the only thing that's still tough to come by is specific, professional-quality personal instruction.
Now, with the Internet it's now ridiculously easy for homeschool students to find almost anything they need to pursue their special interests. When I was in school it was back in the old dial-up days, when things didn't work half the time. About the only thing that's still tough to come by is specific, professional-quality personal instruction.
3.28.2011 | 5:23pm
Suzie Andres says:
David, thank you for your thoughtful article. It makes me wonder where I’ve been all these years. My husband and I have been homeschooling our children since 1996, and I don’t remember being asked about socialization. Perhaps I am forgetting some early conversations with the skeptical, or perhaps our having lived in three university/college towns (my husband is a philosophy professor) among hundreds of other homeschooling families accounts for the acceptance we’ve experienced.
Another commenter has mentioned John Taylor Gatto’s work, which came to my mind as I read your article. His books persuasively trace the history of American compulsory schooling back to its chilling roots, and paired with his own experience of decades in the New York public school system (during which time he was honored more than once by the powers that be) are quite eye-opening and well worth reading.
Others, too, have commented on the socialization angle. Thanks to Tony Esolen for his points, as well as for his excellent new book. My husband’s experience teaching at the college level for the past eighteen years (and my experience hosting his students in our home) bears out Tony’s positive experience with homeschool graduates.
Our oldest son, homeschooled since first grade, is now bringing home his friends from college. Many of them were homeschooled, others went to various types of schools, all were raised by attentive loving parents. I can’t tell the difference between them, which leads me to conclude that there are many successful ways to educate – homeschooling right in there among them.
One attribute I’ve noticed in my twenty-year-old son is his lack of interest in cliques and his ability to mingle with people of any age. He was never limited to spending the day with peers exactly his age (although his extroverted temperament ensured that he spent most days with people beyond those in our home), and now I’m amused to see that although he is officially a college junior, he constantly brings home friends from the freshman, sophomore, and senior classes, as well as fellow juniors.
Two final thoughts:
No one has yet addressed the more common problem I’ve observed among homeschoolers. How in the world does anyone get school work done between the many “extra-curricular” activities and social commitments homeschooling families enjoy?
And finally, what about socialization – for the homeschooling mother?
Both of these issues are addressed with humor and intelligence by Terri Aquilina and Leonie Westenberg, respectively, in my new book "A Little Way of Homeschooling." These articulate women, plus ten others, have joined me to help set to rest many of the questions and doubts people raise about homeschooling. And if you thought they questioned homeschooling, imagine what they say about unschooling – homeschooling without a set curriculum! The book is available from Hillsideeducation.com, along with another homeschooling book specifically about socialization: "Haystack Full of Needles," by Alice Gunther.
Gone are the days when we remain silent before the skeptics, bullies, and even the well-meaning but perplexed friends and relatives who have never questioned “the system.” Those of us who homeschool have had time to think long and hard about why we do what we do. Thanks again, David, for bringing up the topic. Your article reassures me that there are still those whose eyebrows disappear under their hairline when they meet a homeschooling parent. It’s good to know we are still provoking concern. After all, now that so many do homeschool, I’d hate to see the counter-cultural fun of it disappear entirely.
Another commenter has mentioned John Taylor Gatto’s work, which came to my mind as I read your article. His books persuasively trace the history of American compulsory schooling back to its chilling roots, and paired with his own experience of decades in the New York public school system (during which time he was honored more than once by the powers that be) are quite eye-opening and well worth reading.
Others, too, have commented on the socialization angle. Thanks to Tony Esolen for his points, as well as for his excellent new book. My husband’s experience teaching at the college level for the past eighteen years (and my experience hosting his students in our home) bears out Tony’s positive experience with homeschool graduates.
Our oldest son, homeschooled since first grade, is now bringing home his friends from college. Many of them were homeschooled, others went to various types of schools, all were raised by attentive loving parents. I can’t tell the difference between them, which leads me to conclude that there are many successful ways to educate – homeschooling right in there among them.
One attribute I’ve noticed in my twenty-year-old son is his lack of interest in cliques and his ability to mingle with people of any age. He was never limited to spending the day with peers exactly his age (although his extroverted temperament ensured that he spent most days with people beyond those in our home), and now I’m amused to see that although he is officially a college junior, he constantly brings home friends from the freshman, sophomore, and senior classes, as well as fellow juniors.
Two final thoughts:
No one has yet addressed the more common problem I’ve observed among homeschoolers. How in the world does anyone get school work done between the many “extra-curricular” activities and social commitments homeschooling families enjoy?
And finally, what about socialization – for the homeschooling mother?
Both of these issues are addressed with humor and intelligence by Terri Aquilina and Leonie Westenberg, respectively, in my new book "A Little Way of Homeschooling." These articulate women, plus ten others, have joined me to help set to rest many of the questions and doubts people raise about homeschooling. And if you thought they questioned homeschooling, imagine what they say about unschooling – homeschooling without a set curriculum! The book is available from Hillsideeducation.com, along with another homeschooling book specifically about socialization: "Haystack Full of Needles," by Alice Gunther.
Gone are the days when we remain silent before the skeptics, bullies, and even the well-meaning but perplexed friends and relatives who have never questioned “the system.” Those of us who homeschool have had time to think long and hard about why we do what we do. Thanks again, David, for bringing up the topic. Your article reassures me that there are still those whose eyebrows disappear under their hairline when they meet a homeschooling parent. It’s good to know we are still provoking concern. After all, now that so many do homeschool, I’d hate to see the counter-cultural fun of it disappear entirely.
3.28.2011 | 5:27pm
Jenni says:
Willard says "Aside from 1) socialization, there are a couple of other possible major problems with home schooling.
Another problem is that 3) "home schooling" often becomes an excuse for kids to stop going to school, and not doing anything at home either. I have personally discovered several such cases. Where the parents claimed to be "home schooling" their children. But they had never registered them, and never really undertook any real schooling at all."
@ Williard #3 just makes no sense. You are suggesting that homeschooling isn't a good method beccausee there are people who don't homeschool. Those people aren't homeschooling. They may use the law to let them out of a "brick and mortar" school but that isn't the homeschooling we are talking about here.
As to your #2 comment, that is truely offensive. Criminals will hunt and find their prey regardless. Please don't assume that good people are bad because some abuse the system. There are teachers who assult children in the news frequently. These comments are offensive and rather ignorant of the process of truely homeschooling.
Another problem is that 3) "home schooling" often becomes an excuse for kids to stop going to school, and not doing anything at home either. I have personally discovered several such cases. Where the parents claimed to be "home schooling" their children. But they had never registered them, and never really undertook any real schooling at all."
@ Williard #3 just makes no sense. You are suggesting that homeschooling isn't a good method beccausee there are people who don't homeschool. Those people aren't homeschooling. They may use the law to let them out of a "brick and mortar" school but that isn't the homeschooling we are talking about here.
As to your #2 comment, that is truely offensive. Criminals will hunt and find their prey regardless. Please don't assume that good people are bad because some abuse the system. There are teachers who assult children in the news frequently. These comments are offensive and rather ignorant of the process of truely homeschooling.
3.28.2011 | 5:50pm
Jack says:
I find it very interesting that just as the original article was addressing the shifting biases in our American culture and liberal subcultures pertaining to how we educate our children, most of the comments being printed here betray a bias of the other (dare I say conservative?) side, for which I am very sensitive. While Mr. Mills was witnessing a shift in the early left (“hippies living on communes” or “academics protesting…”) from being proponents of home-schooling to being “alarmed” at its popularity with those not in concert with them, my wife and I experienced the shift of the “conservative” viewpoint. At one stage in our sons’ upbringing, we and another couple transferred our children from a private Christian school to the local and very excellent public school. Both couples did this primarily because of two factors, cost and quality of education. We weighed the prospect of home schooling but chose not to because of our inability to provide the quality education our children needed. We never criticized anyone who home schooled or provided private education. All four of us parents remained very active in the local school and afterschool activities. We coached sports teams, chaperoned field trips, made all parent–teacher meetings, went to parties, laughed and cried at school plays, and (at least I did) dissected frogs for their fifth grade classes. We were (and still are) active participants in our children’s lives. However, at church, we were the ones being looked at with furrowed brows and pursed lips. We were constantly asked how we could subject our children to the horrors of public education. Finally, one Sunday, the last straw hit the camel for the other couple when the Assistant Pastor’s sermon proclaimed the evils of public institutions (especially the schools) and parents are sinning against their children by participating in them. Later, we were told not take it personally; after all, I was an Elder in that community. The other couple left that church. We stayed and through prayer and quiet persuasion, the attitudes did soften. Please remember, that every couple that is blessed with children is also challenged to provide for those children as best they can. Some home-school, some provide private schooling, some use the public schools. Many children are successful in each of these venues, sadly many are not. Sometimes it has to do with parental choices, sometimes with the choices children make.
3.28.2011 | 6:08pm
Jay says:
My wife and I decided to homeschool this year, and it seems (according to the small sample on this site) that we're in the minority because we DIDN'T homeschool as a reaction against what is available in the schools. In fact, we're blessed to be able to stay active in the Catholic school that they attended last year, especially on the sports teams, and we still support that school financially and in other ways.
For us it was a simple matter of quality time. With babies at home, we couldn't continue to shuffle the school kids off in the morning, pick them up 7-8 hours later, nag them through their homework and bedtime routine... and also have time for quality conversations and family activities. This year I get to do math with my 10-year-old before I go to work in the morning, and that alone has been great for our relationship. Add to that the friendship-building field trips that the flexible schedule has enabled, and I wouldn't trade it for anything in the world.
But again, it had nothing to do with the "mainstream" educational choices available to us, which are excellent.
For us it was a simple matter of quality time. With babies at home, we couldn't continue to shuffle the school kids off in the morning, pick them up 7-8 hours later, nag them through their homework and bedtime routine... and also have time for quality conversations and family activities. This year I get to do math with my 10-year-old before I go to work in the morning, and that alone has been great for our relationship. Add to that the friendship-building field trips that the flexible schedule has enabled, and I wouldn't trade it for anything in the world.
But again, it had nothing to do with the "mainstream" educational choices available to us, which are excellent.
3.28.2011 | 6:30pm
Bop says:
@Suzie Andres
“Our oldest son, homeschooled since first grade, is now bringing home his friends from college. Many of them were homeschooled, others went to various types of schools, all were raised by attentive loving parents…. One attribute I’ve noticed in my twenty-year-old son is his lack of interest in cliques… and now I’m amused to see that although he is officially a college junior, he constantly brings home friends from the freshman, sophomore, and senior classes, as well as fellow juniors.”
Is it luck or just pure misfortune that all the friends your son brings home were raised by attentive, loving parents? Did he not make friends with anyone who was raised by inattentive, unloving parents? Or is it just that he chose not to bring those friends home to see you? But I can hardly believe he would willingly not befriend the parentally unattended and unloved, seeing as he has no interest in cliques. What a strange, wonderful thing. I think he must be absolutely blessed, or cursed.
“Our oldest son, homeschooled since first grade, is now bringing home his friends from college. Many of them were homeschooled, others went to various types of schools, all were raised by attentive loving parents…. One attribute I’ve noticed in my twenty-year-old son is his lack of interest in cliques… and now I’m amused to see that although he is officially a college junior, he constantly brings home friends from the freshman, sophomore, and senior classes, as well as fellow juniors.”
Is it luck or just pure misfortune that all the friends your son brings home were raised by attentive, loving parents? Did he not make friends with anyone who was raised by inattentive, unloving parents? Or is it just that he chose not to bring those friends home to see you? But I can hardly believe he would willingly not befriend the parentally unattended and unloved, seeing as he has no interest in cliques. What a strange, wonderful thing. I think he must be absolutely blessed, or cursed.
3.28.2011 | 6:44pm
guest says:
I guess Willard would know about abuse and socialization, trapped in that moldering mansion with a domineering mother and only two friends, one of which turned on him ....
Speaking of socialization, I'm a product of government schools, from the experimental preschool I attended through a bachelor's degree. I am an extremely shy and poorly sociable, some would say anti-social, person, always was, and the government couldn't take that away from me. It's not about the wonderful social opportunities in the institutional schools. There is no tabula rasa upon which the government can write beautiful music.
Speaking of socialization, I'm a product of government schools, from the experimental preschool I attended through a bachelor's degree. I am an extremely shy and poorly sociable, some would say anti-social, person, always was, and the government couldn't take that away from me. It's not about the wonderful social opportunities in the institutional schools. There is no tabula rasa upon which the government can write beautiful music.
3.28.2011 | 6:51pm
Dvo says:
Frankly, ALL kids should be "home-schooled", that is, with parents as the primary source of intellectual, emotional, physical and even spiritual guidance for their children. One might choose to "subcontract" the teaching of math, science, english, etc. to public or private schools, but it's a poor parent indeed who imagines their role ends there. Sadly, many parents do. This as much as anything provides the opportunity for those with a secular, leftist agenda to establish the direction of public education. I must also add, however, that while I believe that all parents have the unquestionable right to send their kids to private schools or choose a home school option, I don't have a lot of patience for those do so and then vociferously lament the state of public schools. These are people who have decided to take their ball and go home, so to speak. They have chosen not to contribute their time, energy and rescources in helping shape public education. It's interesting to imagine how their influence might have made a difference in how public schools go about their business. Oh, well, it's a free country...at least for now.
3.28.2011 | 7:20pm
Maria P says:
@ Bop: You're very much spouting the anti-homeschooling rhetoric so characteristic of the media-informed. Most parents are the FIRST teachers of their children...and if you're paying attention, the kids learn by observation. Therefore, your assertion that the role of parent and the role of teacher should never meet, is already flawed.
3.28.2011 | 7:46pm
Lisa says:
@Fr. Phillip Neri
We are UD grads who homeschool our 8! children and hope that they one day have the privilege of attending our alma mater. In this local community (Irving), there are over 100 homeschooled kids who are children of UD alums and other UD related folk. God Bless you and the University!!
We are UD grads who homeschool our 8! children and hope that they one day have the privilege of attending our alma mater. In this local community (Irving), there are over 100 homeschooled kids who are children of UD alums and other UD related folk. God Bless you and the University!!
3.28.2011 | 8:20pm
Edward Alleyn says:
Too often "socialization" means accepting the ideas and values of public school teachers. We have just witnessed in New Jersey and Wisconsin the attitudes and values of many, perhaps even most, of those teachers.
The question we should ask the parents of children in public schools is this: "What kind of socialization is your child receiving?"
The question we should ask the parents of children in public schools is this: "What kind of socialization is your child receiving?"
3.28.2011 | 8:25pm
Dad says:
" I think he must be absolutely blessed, or cursed."
One ought to be more careful when one speaks about another's children. Comments often can be misconstrued as springing forth from either a poor education or poor character.
One ought to be more careful when one speaks about another's children. Comments often can be misconstrued as springing forth from either a poor education or poor character.
3.28.2011 | 9:08pm
FW Ken says:
I am old bachelor who never had kids, so perhaps I shouldn't comment. But of course I will.
A few years back I was helping with our parish religious education and also attending performances of an "academy" designed for home-schoolers who wanted fine arts for their kids. Seeing public school kids and home-schooled kids back-to-back was intriguing. The former were clannish, unfriendly and suspicious towards adults, and seemed generally unhappy. The home-schooled kids interacted positively with each other and adults. They were cheerful and open souls, unlike public school counterparts. This confirmed observations I've made about cousins who home-schooled.
Obviously the comments above show that some kids and some parents don't do well home-schooling. Sadly, internet trollery continues apace making broad statements from individual cases. Because some home-schooling isn't optimal, every child should suffer in a public school, as I did.
A few years back I was helping with our parish religious education and also attending performances of an "academy" designed for home-schoolers who wanted fine arts for their kids. Seeing public school kids and home-schooled kids back-to-back was intriguing. The former were clannish, unfriendly and suspicious towards adults, and seemed generally unhappy. The home-schooled kids interacted positively with each other and adults. They were cheerful and open souls, unlike public school counterparts. This confirmed observations I've made about cousins who home-schooled.
Obviously the comments above show that some kids and some parents don't do well home-schooling. Sadly, internet trollery continues apace making broad statements from individual cases. Because some home-schooling isn't optimal, every child should suffer in a public school, as I did.
3.28.2011 | 9:13pm
Musicforkids says:
Homeschooling works for some and others it doesn't. There are good and bad parents and good and bad teachers. For me home schooling wouldn't work because the task seems very daunting and I"m busy with other things. I'm very involved in my son's life but need the away time when he's at school also.
3.28.2011 | 9:50pm
Frances says:
I'm a 21-year-old senior in nursing school (graduating in a month!) who was home schooled up until 8th grade, at which point I was educated in the Catholic school system until graduating from high school.
Growing up I found few issues with socialization (my 12 siblings were plenty of socialization, not to mention the various home schooled communities and families I interacted with throughout my childhood, as well as families within the public and parochial school systems), but some of my older siblings who did not attend a high school met with difficulties related to sports (we love sports in my family!), and some did find difficulty after completing high school. Today I find no issues with socialization; I may have a bit of a shy disposition, but I've always found myself able to approach others and engage in conversation with anyone who's willing.
I think that this issue, as well as any when it comes to education, depends both on the child and on the attention and family atmosphere received at home.
I am very glad to have been home schooled for a time in my childhood, yet I am also very glad that I completed my education in a school system.
Two things I would like to mention about the system of home schooling in general-
1) I think it needs to be more consistently regulated! There are families out there going at a "no-schooling" approach- the parents allow their children to choose any education method, but do not provide any structure or concrete education (and in my opinion deprive their children of many opportunities in life!)... and this falls within the set regimens of home schooling. How is that fair to people who are actually providing their children with an adequate education through home schooling? Not only that, these are the types of things that give home schoolers a bad name.
2) There shouldn't be such a stigma on home schooling!(I know that's quite obvious)... but people should be just as open to home schooling as they are to parochial schools, charter schools and public schools- some public schools may be fantastic, some charter schools may be bad, some home schoolers may be geniuses, some parochial schools may be awful! As with any education, it depends. It's not fair to make generalizations, nor to base your opinions on the exceptions. Research what is available to you and what works best for you and your family.
Growing up I found few issues with socialization (my 12 siblings were plenty of socialization, not to mention the various home schooled communities and families I interacted with throughout my childhood, as well as families within the public and parochial school systems), but some of my older siblings who did not attend a high school met with difficulties related to sports (we love sports in my family!), and some did find difficulty after completing high school. Today I find no issues with socialization; I may have a bit of a shy disposition, but I've always found myself able to approach others and engage in conversation with anyone who's willing.
I think that this issue, as well as any when it comes to education, depends both on the child and on the attention and family atmosphere received at home.
I am very glad to have been home schooled for a time in my childhood, yet I am also very glad that I completed my education in a school system.
Two things I would like to mention about the system of home schooling in general-
1) I think it needs to be more consistently regulated! There are families out there going at a "no-schooling" approach- the parents allow their children to choose any education method, but do not provide any structure or concrete education (and in my opinion deprive their children of many opportunities in life!)... and this falls within the set regimens of home schooling. How is that fair to people who are actually providing their children with an adequate education through home schooling? Not only that, these are the types of things that give home schoolers a bad name.
2) There shouldn't be such a stigma on home schooling!(I know that's quite obvious)... but people should be just as open to home schooling as they are to parochial schools, charter schools and public schools- some public schools may be fantastic, some charter schools may be bad, some home schoolers may be geniuses, some parochial schools may be awful! As with any education, it depends. It's not fair to make generalizations, nor to base your opinions on the exceptions. Research what is available to you and what works best for you and your family.
3.28.2011 | 9:52pm
Catholic Parent says:
Or.... maybe people ask that question (or wonder as I do) because they have met more than one clan of seriously messed up kids. This is an embarrasing blemish on the Catholic homeschooling front that no one seems to be seriously addressing. Maybe your kids are alright and are functioning well as members of society, but there are more than a few who are just not able. In schools a child may get stuck with a weirdo teacher for a year, then they move on... But what if the parents are the weirdos? The children have no where to turn. I have seen this more than once... and I know that you all have to, but are afraid to mention it. I doubt that the question comes from the ideological resentment that Mr. Mills cynically portrays in this commentary. Most of the time it is just a decent person concerned that a new flock of kids wearing clothes made out of curtains and dull, lifeless expressions on their faces are about to enter society for better or for worse!
3.28.2011 | 9:53pm
Anonymous 3 says:
There is mention in one of the comments about a hybrid system ..in this era of fast improving technologies, that , hopefully could be a more ideal situation for many .
And The Church also can be more involved , at lesser cost than parochial schools - in larger communities where there are enough children , the parish could offer special liturgy few times during the month for the home schooling families at coveniant hours ; hearing the word of God , in the context of The LIturgy in considered the ideal format and fostering other devotions too !
Such a net work of parents might be able to serve as 'substitute teachers ' to help each other's children , depending on individual strenghts .
Those who have to deal with less than ideal public school systems , keeping in mind the troubled backgrounds of many , the need for prayer , for the whole group to be taken even more seriously - warfare prayers and all , esp. while visiting the school too ; children exposed to evil influnces , not just through T.V but even tarot cards , oujia boards and such ...thus good to send one's own childre with enough spiritual armor , including blessed medals .
Such is what our Lord is asking us - to bring all , sinners and devout , to His mercy , so that many would be able to live lives as it is meant to be - in holiness and peace !
Hope too that many Catholic parents would esp. take the trouble to learn about and to ensure that The Octave of Easter , The Feast of Mercy , gets celebrated in their churches, at every Holy Mass so that no body has to miss out !
http://marianweb.net/archives/flash/fso/video.php?id=1
good talk on how this is an ancient Feast and timely for our times .
And the requirements for the celebration are rather simple too , as given here , since the focus of the Feast is on the sacraments of mercy - confession and communion - http://www.thedivinemercy.org/mercysunday/faq.php
Commercial printers can get this Original Icon of Mercy printed and mounted without that much expense even for good size image and thus can be made available to all churches and persons - http://www.faustina-message.com/index.htm
One often negelectd point may be too - the custom from Old Testament times on, to show gratitude for the priests on such festive occasions with an extra gift - a few at parish level or higher taking initiative to do so would be good for all concerned ...
and who knows - our fidelity in such matters possibly would even prevent situations that lead to much heartache and million dollar school related settlements in the future !
Our communities and families , thus being guided by The Spirit, by His mercy then can choose what is the best situation for each , as far as school of wisdom , in all areas !
And The Church also can be more involved , at lesser cost than parochial schools - in larger communities where there are enough children , the parish could offer special liturgy few times during the month for the home schooling families at coveniant hours ; hearing the word of God , in the context of The LIturgy in considered the ideal format and fostering other devotions too !
Such a net work of parents might be able to serve as 'substitute teachers ' to help each other's children , depending on individual strenghts .
Those who have to deal with less than ideal public school systems , keeping in mind the troubled backgrounds of many , the need for prayer , for the whole group to be taken even more seriously - warfare prayers and all , esp. while visiting the school too ; children exposed to evil influnces , not just through T.V but even tarot cards , oujia boards and such ...thus good to send one's own childre with enough spiritual armor , including blessed medals .
Such is what our Lord is asking us - to bring all , sinners and devout , to His mercy , so that many would be able to live lives as it is meant to be - in holiness and peace !
Hope too that many Catholic parents would esp. take the trouble to learn about and to ensure that The Octave of Easter , The Feast of Mercy , gets celebrated in their churches, at every Holy Mass so that no body has to miss out !
http://marianweb.net/archives/flash/fso/video.php?id=1
good talk on how this is an ancient Feast and timely for our times .
And the requirements for the celebration are rather simple too , as given here , since the focus of the Feast is on the sacraments of mercy - confession and communion - http://www.thedivinemercy.org/mercysunday/faq.php
Commercial printers can get this Original Icon of Mercy printed and mounted without that much expense even for good size image and thus can be made available to all churches and persons - http://www.faustina-message.com/index.htm
One often negelectd point may be too - the custom from Old Testament times on, to show gratitude for the priests on such festive occasions with an extra gift - a few at parish level or higher taking initiative to do so would be good for all concerned ...
and who knows - our fidelity in such matters possibly would even prevent situations that lead to much heartache and million dollar school related settlements in the future !
Our communities and families , thus being guided by The Spirit, by His mercy then can choose what is the best situation for each , as far as school of wisdom , in all areas !
3.28.2011 | 10:12pm
Tony Esolen says:
I've commented mainly on the benefits of homeschooling ... now for what I'd like to label, Do You Want an Engraved Dismissal?
1. Some years ago -- I apologize for not knowing the statistic now -- my wife and I learned that the average SAT score for college freshmen intending to study education was 855. That would be a full standard deviation below an already low mean. Translated: the average freshman intending to become a teacher performed at the 16th percentile, for all entering freshmen.
2. When I teach sophomore level literature courses, which I do every so often, I spend quite a lot of time un-teaching the silly things that the students have been taught in their schools (and here I make no distinction between public and private schools). I have not met a single student in 20 years who actually could say anything sensible about English grammar, UNLESS said student had learned it by studying an inflected language like Latin or German. Not one student in thirty will know what a participle is. But most of them do "know" rules that are not rules, as "Never begin a sentence with 'but'," and, more absurd than that, "Never begin a sentence with 'because'." My colleague in linguistics was shocked a few years ago when my daughter's classmates confirmed the absurdity -- she hardly knew where to begin with it.
3. Teachers of math complain about much the same thing. It is hard to tell which is taught more poorly in our schools, English or math. My guess is that English is, because the wrong answers in math are painfully recognizable. But students for many years have confirmed my suspicion that math is not taught as a systematic discipline, a coherent whole -- rather as a grab bag of rules and formulas that make no sense, but that are supposed to "work". That is not teaching. It is training, as of dogs.
4. Every time I encounter directly what is going on in schools, I have to file it in my category labeled, "Sure, I thought it was bad, but I had no idea ..." A tour around the internet is instructive in this regard. Look at lesson plans for classic novels like The Scarlet Letter. Make sure you have a bag nearby.
5. Christian parents in particular must accept the fact, painful as it may be, that the textbooks and the curricula and often the teachers themselves seek to undermine pretty much everything that we hold most dear. In History -- if it is taught at all, rather than being folded into Social Studies -- the students are taught to look down upon the Founding Fathers, and to despise their own country. That's just for starters. Shall we move on to the corruption of their morals?
Look, it may be the case that homeschooling is not for everyone. But I see the results of the "good" public schools every day. They are my freshmen at Providence College. And things go downhill from there.
1. Some years ago -- I apologize for not knowing the statistic now -- my wife and I learned that the average SAT score for college freshmen intending to study education was 855. That would be a full standard deviation below an already low mean. Translated: the average freshman intending to become a teacher performed at the 16th percentile, for all entering freshmen.
2. When I teach sophomore level literature courses, which I do every so often, I spend quite a lot of time un-teaching the silly things that the students have been taught in their schools (and here I make no distinction between public and private schools). I have not met a single student in 20 years who actually could say anything sensible about English grammar, UNLESS said student had learned it by studying an inflected language like Latin or German. Not one student in thirty will know what a participle is. But most of them do "know" rules that are not rules, as "Never begin a sentence with 'but'," and, more absurd than that, "Never begin a sentence with 'because'." My colleague in linguistics was shocked a few years ago when my daughter's classmates confirmed the absurdity -- she hardly knew where to begin with it.
3. Teachers of math complain about much the same thing. It is hard to tell which is taught more poorly in our schools, English or math. My guess is that English is, because the wrong answers in math are painfully recognizable. But students for many years have confirmed my suspicion that math is not taught as a systematic discipline, a coherent whole -- rather as a grab bag of rules and formulas that make no sense, but that are supposed to "work". That is not teaching. It is training, as of dogs.
4. Every time I encounter directly what is going on in schools, I have to file it in my category labeled, "Sure, I thought it was bad, but I had no idea ..." A tour around the internet is instructive in this regard. Look at lesson plans for classic novels like The Scarlet Letter. Make sure you have a bag nearby.
5. Christian parents in particular must accept the fact, painful as it may be, that the textbooks and the curricula and often the teachers themselves seek to undermine pretty much everything that we hold most dear. In History -- if it is taught at all, rather than being folded into Social Studies -- the students are taught to look down upon the Founding Fathers, and to despise their own country. That's just for starters. Shall we move on to the corruption of their morals?
Look, it may be the case that homeschooling is not for everyone. But I see the results of the "good" public schools every day. They are my freshmen at Providence College. And things go downhill from there.
3.28.2011 | 10:13pm
Sally Thomas says:
Fr. Philip Neri: My eldest daughter will be among the homeschool graduates in the UD class of 2015. And my husband, also a college professor, has the same things to say about the homeschooled students he encounters in his classes.
3.28.2011 | 10:54pm
Margaret says:
We've done a bit of both with our kids. We were initially advised to homeschool our son for reasons of giftedness. We did so for a while, but moved him over fairly recently (9th grade) so that he could take AP Calculus with a well-qualified math instructor. Now in 10th grade, we have the good fortune that his school is paying for EPGY university-level math for him. He likes science and has well-equipped labs at school that we couldn't give him at home. He enjoys orchestra and team sports and is generally a happy guy. We don't want him going off to college yet, and high school gives him enough college-level work through APs that he'll graduate a year early with a couple of years of college credits under his belt. It's been an interesting ride with this young man, and I feel he's been well-served by both home school and public school at different stages of his life.
I don't think this needs to be a heated either/or debate. A lot of kids do both these days -- a few years homeschooling, a few years in the local public school. There are a growing number of virtual public schools and other school/homeschool options within the public school system.
I don't think this needs to be a heated either/or debate. A lot of kids do both these days -- a few years homeschooling, a few years in the local public school. There are a growing number of virtual public schools and other school/homeschool options within the public school system.
3.28.2011 | 11:14pm
Keith Pavlischek says:
SUZIE ANDRES says, "No one has yet addressed the more common problem I’ve observed among homeschoolers. How in the world does anyone get school work done between the many “extra-curricular” activities and social commitments homeschooling families enjoy?"
Exactly, and THAT is the best answer to the "socialization" charge.
Exactly, and THAT is the best answer to the "socialization" charge.
3.28.2011 | 11:49pm
Ruth Haydon says:
My oldest daughter went to a Christian school. My youngest went to school through fourth grade but was overwhelmed in fifth grade. That is when I decided to homeschool her. She is in college now and on the dean's list. At the time we started she would do her work in the morning, eat lunch and then take a nap because she was tired. We finished school in the later afternoon. We were not involved in homeschool groups but she continued to take classes at the Christian School and was involved in church activities and with the neighborhood children. It was not til she was in 10th grade that we found out that her kidneys were failing and that was why she tired so easily. She had a kidney transplant the following year and improved dramatically. Because we home schooled she finished school on time, did well on her SATs and is doing wonderfully in college. I am also closer with her than her sister who also did fine in college. I wouldn't change a thing.
3.29.2011 | 12:22am
patricksarsfield says:
The reason public schools have a monopoly on education is because the anti-Catholic nativists of this country abandoned sectarian schools in the 1830s when Cathlics looked for their share of the public dollar that had gone to support sectarian schools until then. The "Public School" (read "Protestant School") movement then rose to the fore as a way of denying Catholic schools any aid.
When Catholics gained greater power in several states over the next 40 years (i.e., into the 1870s), the still dominant anti-Catholic forces in this country sought to perpetuate the rule against Catholic schools getting any aid through the passage of "Blaine Amendments" to most state constitutions.
When Catholics gained still greater political power in several (primarily Northeastern) states throughout the first half of the 20th Century, the nativists, including the viciously anti-Catholic Ku Klux Klanner Hugo Black, erected a second line of defense: the interpretation of the First Amendment, as barring aid to parochial schools, that had never prevented state support for Protestant sectarian schools in the period before Catholics started asking for their fair share of state support.
This is the real shame of the public school monopoly. Back in the late 1950s, Catholic schools educated about 10% of US children. Today, Catholic schools are going the way of the do-do. Whatever value homeschooling may have, it will never have a shade of the influence for good that Catholic schools once had.
When Catholics gained greater power in several states over the next 40 years (i.e., into the 1870s), the still dominant anti-Catholic forces in this country sought to perpetuate the rule against Catholic schools getting any aid through the passage of "Blaine Amendments" to most state constitutions.
When Catholics gained still greater political power in several (primarily Northeastern) states throughout the first half of the 20th Century, the nativists, including the viciously anti-Catholic Ku Klux Klanner Hugo Black, erected a second line of defense: the interpretation of the First Amendment, as barring aid to parochial schools, that had never prevented state support for Protestant sectarian schools in the period before Catholics started asking for their fair share of state support.
This is the real shame of the public school monopoly. Back in the late 1950s, Catholic schools educated about 10% of US children. Today, Catholic schools are going the way of the do-do. Whatever value homeschooling may have, it will never have a shade of the influence for good that Catholic schools once had.
3.29.2011 | 2:01am
Jessica says:
I have to agree with Phoebe here: homeschooling is not always ideal. I am now in my late twenties and was homeschooled up until the 6th grade, at which point I began attending parochial school. I am quite thankful that I was homeschooled in early childhood; I had time and opportunity to read voraciously and was considerably ahead of my classmates academically when I started 6th grade - in some areas. In others I was behind, though I caught up quickly. However, I became lonely and isolated, and even depressed, around age 10 - I begged my parents to let me go to school. We had moved to a small town with no homeschooling resources, I had never been on sports teams, and I had very little contact with children besides my younger brothers. It took me until mid-high school to feel at ease in social interactions.
I'm not disparaging homeschooling; I would likely homeschool my kids (if I have any) until age 7 or 8 if the conditions were right. But it seems naive to be doctrinaire about its superiority as THE Christian way of education. I see mainly just homeschooling parents praising it here; perhaps more homeschooled kids would have a more ambivalent view?
I'm not disparaging homeschooling; I would likely homeschool my kids (if I have any) until age 7 or 8 if the conditions were right. But it seems naive to be doctrinaire about its superiority as THE Christian way of education. I see mainly just homeschooling parents praising it here; perhaps more homeschooled kids would have a more ambivalent view?
3.29.2011 | 3:34am
Wolf Paul says:
This has been an interesting discussion to follow. All of you Christian homeschoolers, as well as any other Christian readers, remember to pray for conservative Christians in Germany, mostly Baptists of Russian-German background, who are routinely sent to jail for contempt because they want to homeschool their children or refuse to let them attend primary school sex education classes which teach a values-free approach to sexuality.
3.29.2011 | 7:44am
Judy K. Warner says:
Jessica et al,
I sympathize with those who ran into trouble homeschooling because of lack of other homeschoolers and/or resources. We homeschooled our daughter through eighth grade, but put her in first grade for a few months after we had moved to a new area, the existing homeschool group dissolved and we didn't know many people. Being an extremely social child, she was lonely and cranky so we tried school. She didn't mind it at first, but she entered in mid-year and a queen bee girl targeted her. It took all her social ingenuity to deal with it, and she did, but it annoyed her because the homeschoolers she knew didn't act like that. She also thought the books they had were dumb. We were greatly relieved when the homeschool group reconstituted. If we hadn't had the group I don't know what we would have done.
I sympathize with those who ran into trouble homeschooling because of lack of other homeschoolers and/or resources. We homeschooled our daughter through eighth grade, but put her in first grade for a few months after we had moved to a new area, the existing homeschool group dissolved and we didn't know many people. Being an extremely social child, she was lonely and cranky so we tried school. She didn't mind it at first, but she entered in mid-year and a queen bee girl targeted her. It took all her social ingenuity to deal with it, and she did, but it annoyed her because the homeschoolers she knew didn't act like that. She also thought the books they had were dumb. We were greatly relieved when the homeschool group reconstituted. If we hadn't had the group I don't know what we would have done.
3.29.2011 | 9:15am
Mike Melendez says:
I've been pondering what Bop had to say and reading the comments on his thoughts. I have decided that Bop is not so much ironic as inchoate.
Bop, I pray you find what you're looking for.
Bop, I pray you find what you're looking for.
3.29.2011 | 9:48am
Robin says:
Regarding socialization:
When I've been asked, as a homeschooler, about socialization, I usually answer, "Well, my children are able to coherently communicate with adults in Walmart. What more do we need?"
Most ridiculous question I've been asked? After mentioning to someone that I homeschool, after a long pause they asked, "But....what about the prom?"
That's right. Throw all of the statistics about the good of homeschooling out the window. They might miss the prom.
When I've been asked, as a homeschooler, about socialization, I usually answer, "Well, my children are able to coherently communicate with adults in Walmart. What more do we need?"
Most ridiculous question I've been asked? After mentioning to someone that I homeschool, after a long pause they asked, "But....what about the prom?"
That's right. Throw all of the statistics about the good of homeschooling out the window. They might miss the prom.
3.29.2011 | 9:54am
Old Buckeye says:
Most people confuse "socialization" with "socializing." Socialization involves fitting into a society, something that homeschoolers do quite well, given that many of them are exposed to all age segments of society in the learning activities they embark upon, rather than being compartmentalized strictly on age or grade level in the old German model that was meant to produce citizens.
3.29.2011 | 10:23am
David Mills says:
Thank you all for an interesting and helpful discussion. As Tony Esolen says, homeschooling may not be for everyone (in particular if they have access to a good parochial or Christian school, one that's good not just educationally but in the total formation of the child), but I think it ought to be a kind of default position or ideal.
And there are other arguments to be made for it, besides the ones made here. The inevitable secularization of the mind and the imagination that public schooling brings is a big one. Try to find a history class that doesn't speak of "the Enlightenment" as the liberation of the mind and society from religion and the source of all good things in the modern world.
The criticisms seem to be, I have to say, uniformly weak. Most of them depend on criticizing homeschooling in abstraction, and not against the alternatives. So some say that bad parents homeschool or homeschool badly, which is, you know, obvious. We all know that and have factored it into our thinking. But it's also irrelevant unless homeschooling is compared with other forms, public schooling in particular. At that point the judgment shifts radically. If you want to find whole *cohorts* of seriously messed-up kids, look there, not at homeschoolers.
And there are other arguments to be made for it, besides the ones made here. The inevitable secularization of the mind and the imagination that public schooling brings is a big one. Try to find a history class that doesn't speak of "the Enlightenment" as the liberation of the mind and society from religion and the source of all good things in the modern world.
The criticisms seem to be, I have to say, uniformly weak. Most of them depend on criticizing homeschooling in abstraction, and not against the alternatives. So some say that bad parents homeschool or homeschool badly, which is, you know, obvious. We all know that and have factored it into our thinking. But it's also irrelevant unless homeschooling is compared with other forms, public schooling in particular. At that point the judgment shifts radically. If you want to find whole *cohorts* of seriously messed-up kids, look there, not at homeschoolers.
3.29.2011 | 11:25am
mater cantor says:
@ Dvo "These are people who have decided to take their ball and go home, so to speak. They have chosen not to contribute their time, energy and rescources in helping shape public education."
Dvo, perhaps you have not considered that homeschooling parents ARE helping the system - they are helping the next generation of citizens build a solid foundation for the future. I know homeschooled students who are planning on going into the educational field and will be well-prepared to educate the next generation.
I contend that most homeschooling parents ARE contributing much of their time, energy, and resources to help shape the future of education. Yes, that of course means public education as well.
Dvo, perhaps you have not considered that homeschooling parents ARE helping the system - they are helping the next generation of citizens build a solid foundation for the future. I know homeschooled students who are planning on going into the educational field and will be well-prepared to educate the next generation.
I contend that most homeschooling parents ARE contributing much of their time, energy, and resources to help shape the future of education. Yes, that of course means public education as well.
3.29.2011 | 12:37pm
Judy K. Warner says:
Why is it anybody's responsibility to help shape public education? Nobody is obligated to help "the system." What a collectivist mindset.
3.29.2011 | 12:57pm
Bop says:
@David Mills:
“Try to find a history class that doesn't speak of "the Enlightenment" as the liberation of the mind and society from religion and the source of all good things in the modern world.”
And try to find a class that teaches that, as a matter of historical fact, God actually did create someone called Eve from an actual rib bone from someone actually called Adam outside of a homeschool class.
You know, individuals must take their place not only within their family but within the greater community, culture and civilization. At any time there is going to be distortion with respect to the truth, look at the perversions that prevailed prior to the Enlightenment, but this is not a good reason to stay at home or to only consort with the fellow-increasingly-narrow-minded. You know we live in an age which is post Enlightenment and indeed post modern. And there are Christians who are neither narrowly conservative nor narrowly American.
[BTW...Although you have failed to post the last two comments I submitted, I hope you post this comment. I would hate to think that you are censoring my as a matter of principle.]
“Try to find a history class that doesn't speak of "the Enlightenment" as the liberation of the mind and society from religion and the source of all good things in the modern world.”
And try to find a class that teaches that, as a matter of historical fact, God actually did create someone called Eve from an actual rib bone from someone actually called Adam outside of a homeschool class.
You know, individuals must take their place not only within their family but within the greater community, culture and civilization. At any time there is going to be distortion with respect to the truth, look at the perversions that prevailed prior to the Enlightenment, but this is not a good reason to stay at home or to only consort with the fellow-increasingly-narrow-minded. You know we live in an age which is post Enlightenment and indeed post modern. And there are Christians who are neither narrowly conservative nor narrowly American.
[BTW...Although you have failed to post the last two comments I submitted, I hope you post this comment. I would hate to think that you are censoring my as a matter of principle.]
3.29.2011 | 12:59pm
Therese Z says:
Years ago on another blog, I saw a suggestion to use for those occasional situations where it would be easier to lie and make up a school, just to keep the pace through some part of life as fast as needed, to draw little or no attention to oneself. Rather than lie, the blog suggested that homeschoolers say they attend "Holy Family Academy."
3.29.2011 | 1:01pm
a mom says:
Peer-dependency alone is a big enough concern to merit homeschooling, rather than using public school. I have seen this problem arise in my own son, who, while homeschooled through 8th grade (and active in sports & church youth group & homeschool-based social activities) has become an angry young man who declares that "you aren't there for me" and similar blather...he is a junior in a large public high school, who now socializes via facebook & text messages, with occasional IRL encounters! He had - and enjoyed them, too - many more normal socializing opportunities when he was homeschooled, in my opinion. Now he suffers if asked to go to church, or just about anywhere, with us, rather than the "youth Mass" or anywhere else with his peers.
He is a good student, does well on the endless array of standardized tests, yet has to have a hall pass to use the bathroom, and like all the students at that school is endlessly monitored by the attendance machinery...I could stand all of it (and be glad he's a good student), if he would admit how foolish and degrading "the system" is. But he doesn't! He explains to me why a hall pass is necessary. He asks me to call in excuses for his tardies and absences when he oversleeps.
Like many of the commenters, I've read Gatto's tome, too. (The Underground History of American Education) I guess there's still time. As my son has realized that he is a couple of credits shy for graduating with his delightful peers at this delightful school he is agonizing over what if, horrors, he should have to be a 5th year senior. Yes, that is yet another punishment which lies in wait for unsuspecting, hapless public schooled kids -- they may never get out of there. (He places the blame squarely on my shoulders, that I Should Have Known to Make Him Do More Work the one year (10th grade) he was only, and happily, in school part time.)
Meanwhile, his four elder siblings, who graduated with home school diplomas, are making their way in the military and/or in college and working. It was his choice to go to school: I'm not sure it was a wise choice. Probably I (and his father) should not have let him go, as he is, of all our kids, the most driven to academic & physical pursuits. The three public schools he has attended have not encouraged and strengthened him, but have smothered his ability to make his way: he has become convinced that "the school knows best". It is an unhappy state of affairs which I hope is of short duration.
He is a good student, does well on the endless array of standardized tests, yet has to have a hall pass to use the bathroom, and like all the students at that school is endlessly monitored by the attendance machinery...I could stand all of it (and be glad he's a good student), if he would admit how foolish and degrading "the system" is. But he doesn't! He explains to me why a hall pass is necessary. He asks me to call in excuses for his tardies and absences when he oversleeps.
Like many of the commenters, I've read Gatto's tome, too. (The Underground History of American Education) I guess there's still time. As my son has realized that he is a couple of credits shy for graduating with his delightful peers at this delightful school he is agonizing over what if, horrors, he should have to be a 5th year senior. Yes, that is yet another punishment which lies in wait for unsuspecting, hapless public schooled kids -- they may never get out of there. (He places the blame squarely on my shoulders, that I Should Have Known to Make Him Do More Work the one year (10th grade) he was only, and happily, in school part time.)
Meanwhile, his four elder siblings, who graduated with home school diplomas, are making their way in the military and/or in college and working. It was his choice to go to school: I'm not sure it was a wise choice. Probably I (and his father) should not have let him go, as he is, of all our kids, the most driven to academic & physical pursuits. The three public schools he has attended have not encouraged and strengthened him, but have smothered his ability to make his way: he has become convinced that "the school knows best". It is an unhappy state of affairs which I hope is of short duration.
3.29.2011 | 2:06pm
Mike Melendez says:
@Dvo
It's not their "ball" but their children. The difference is night and day.
Are you really saying that taxpayers should not comment on tax funded activity they do not directly participate in?
It's not their "ball" but their children. The difference is night and day.
Are you really saying that taxpayers should not comment on tax funded activity they do not directly participate in?
3.29.2011 | 2:36pm
James P. Crowley says:
For most of human history children worked and learned side by side with their parents or had a tutor come to the home at the parents' request. Only in the last 100 years or so have we had compulsory state-controlled education. I have taught in public high schools for a number of years and have seen the tremendous stresses for many of our youngsters. Socialization for many of our children in public schools is brutal. Learning for many of our children in public schools is rote and often lacking in any real understanding. Homeschooling may not be perfect but it is a much better alternative to public schooling in every area of importance, but especially in socialization and in academics.
3.29.2011 | 2:49pm
Kevin Offner says:
My experience has been that this topic of where and how parents decide to educate their children almost always brings out one's emotions like few other topics do. And I'm referring to Christians. Those who send their kids to public schools are passionate about "being salt and light" in the educational system; those who send their kids to Christian schools are passionate about making sure their kids are taught "Christian values"; and those who homeschool are passionate about the level of parental involvement being as close to 100% as possible.
There's nothing wrong about being passionate about one's decision. But for some reason, it is THIS topic more than others that seems to ignite the evangelistic impulse within people. Christian parents can't seem to talk about their educational choice without insisting that this should be everyone's choice. Here more than elsewhere parents seem to be desperate to have their decision validated by getting others to make the same decision.
I wonder if this is driven by fear that maybe one is not doing what's best for one's children?
There's nothing wrong about being passionate about one's decision. But for some reason, it is THIS topic more than others that seems to ignite the evangelistic impulse within people. Christian parents can't seem to talk about their educational choice without insisting that this should be everyone's choice. Here more than elsewhere parents seem to be desperate to have their decision validated by getting others to make the same decision.
I wonder if this is driven by fear that maybe one is not doing what's best for one's children?
3.29.2011 | 4:45pm
Brandon Dutcher says:
I am encouraged how mainstream homeschooling has become in my home state. A full 56 percent of Oklahomans know someone who homeschools their children:
http://soonerpoll.com/soonerpoll-finds-home-education-becoming-more-mainstream-in-oklahoma/
http://soonerpoll.com/soonerpoll-finds-home-education-becoming-more-mainstream-in-oklahoma/
3.29.2011 | 5:07pm
Assistant Village Idiot says:
Bop, I don't know about David, but I am certainly censoring you by not bothering to read you anymore. It's not the disagreement, it 's the lack of listening and lack of clarity.
Catholic Parent raises an excellent point. I am much in favor of homeschooling in general, but I have known some who are keeping their children home for clearly pathological reasons. (I work at the state psychiatric hospital.) And even home schooling groups sometimes run across people at their fringes who they feel quite nervous around. What should be our response in such instances? How do we build in protections without giving away the store?
Catholic Parent raises an excellent point. I am much in favor of homeschooling in general, but I have known some who are keeping their children home for clearly pathological reasons. (I work at the state psychiatric hospital.) And even home schooling groups sometimes run across people at their fringes who they feel quite nervous around. What should be our response in such instances? How do we build in protections without giving away the store?
3.29.2011 | 5:17pm
Mack Hall says:
I teach public school and, part-time, community-college classes. Some of my best college students were taught at home (I deny that "homeschooled" is a valid construction). There is also a reality that keeping children at home can a cover for abuse. The parents must make the best decision for their children, and when said children haven't been seen in months someone might want to check up on them.
However, even the best-intentioned parents tend not to vote in school board elections or state elections, and public schools are, well, public -- they can do only what democratically elected trustees choose. To fail to vote is to allow unions and monomaniacs to determine what happens in public schools. For a citizen not to vote is a disgraceful abdication of duty to those unfortunate children who are not blessed with loving parents.
However, even the best-intentioned parents tend not to vote in school board elections or state elections, and public schools are, well, public -- they can do only what democratically elected trustees choose. To fail to vote is to allow unions and monomaniacs to determine what happens in public schools. For a citizen not to vote is a disgraceful abdication of duty to those unfortunate children who are not blessed with loving parents.
3.29.2011 | 5:49pm
Maria P says:
In my years teaching, I come across a system that covered up bad behavior for the tuition money that they might otherwise lose.
It seems I wasn't alone in my concern as there is now a series of articles on abuse IN schools....And we all know that this is not an isolated incident....especially since bullying is such a talking point today!
http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/imagine/20110304_MIV/#/36
It seems I wasn't alone in my concern as there is now a series of articles on abuse IN schools....And we all know that this is not an isolated incident....especially since bullying is such a talking point today!
http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/imagine/20110304_MIV/#/36
3.29.2011 | 8:09pm
Joe Z says:
Dvo, I was homeschooled for part of my primary education. Since my parents decided to "take their ball and go home," I'm now a professor teaching college students, where I make my contribution to public education by addressing the remedial needs of my students, especially those who went to public high school. Which of my students is most clearly prepared for college-level work in mathematics, writing, and careful reading? The one home-schooled student, of course. She is an invaluable resource to her classmates in our classes.
Anecdotes aside, when the society's mode of education is such an abject failure - as it is in many public schools - one's duty to one's children obviously comes first. But even if we concede that there is a serious responsibility to have one's family participate in the community's education, why is it self-evident that the relevant community is the public school district? That's really bizarre. Sadly it is typical of a certain political mindset to equate society with institutions of the federal government.
Anecdotes aside, when the society's mode of education is such an abject failure - as it is in many public schools - one's duty to one's children obviously comes first. But even if we concede that there is a serious responsibility to have one's family participate in the community's education, why is it self-evident that the relevant community is the public school district? That's really bizarre. Sadly it is typical of a certain political mindset to equate society with institutions of the federal government.
3.29.2011 | 8:15pm
Joe Z says:
The comments on age cohorts and peer-dependency are spot on. Granted, sometimes people are just curious as to how home-schooled children spend time with others outside of their family. But for the others, it is truly weird to think that "socialization" depends on spending nearly all of one's time with kids of one's own age.
3.29.2011 | 8:19pm
maria says:
I send my children to Catholic school and I appalled by the disregard for institutions of the homeschooling movement. The Western Tradition is a celebration of civilized life over tribal structures, tribal structures like homeschooling. A decent education marks the evolution of custom into law and association into institution. Why it is enough to improve education for merely your own children? Why don't you feel a call to improve Catholic education for as many children as possible? Making a Catholic school a place of financial stability and academic excellence requires the labor and devotion of an active parent community. Why do homeschoolers feel so comfortable opting out of the cultural imperative to support, celebrate and improve Catholic schools? I don't question their liberty or their children's socialization. I object to their absence from the Catholic school system.
3.29.2011 | 8:42pm
Advanced Placement says:
Can I just point out that a vast majority of these comments are attacking the public school system? That's actually not what this article was supposed to be about. It was about the freedom to choose your child's education. I fully agree that everyone has the ability to choose, but many of you seem to be openly attacking public schools to the point of calling them brainwashing. Now, of course there are problems with the education system. We know. And of course you have the right to homeschool your child- unless s/he doesn't want to, and then it should be more the child's choice than the parent's because it's the child's education at stake. But you seem to be praising homeschooling as a sort of shelter from the dangerous perils of Big Brother. I would like to point out that your blanket reasoning is rather faulty.
Also, the concerns that have been noted and usually immediately dismissed, such as the greater risk for abuse and negligence that homeschooling carries, isn't that why you get questions? People want to know your child won't be behind. I mean, sure, there are some who will clearly disdain you, but to say that all people who question are ill-spirited is rather ignorant and, to be completely honest, not especially Christian. I thought that meant caring about your fellow man, which probably includes making sure kids are brought up right in the community, but I might be wrong, I'm just Catholic.
Furthermore, I'd like to note that I went to public school, and though sure, it was filled with peril at times, it wasn't something I would never let my child near as some of you are painting it. If there's something wrong with the school in your community, do something about it! Change it! We live in a democracy, as they taught me in public school, and that means everyone gets a say. Homeschooling your child just because your local schools are deplorable is like not voting. It doesn't solve anything and silences your voice.
Also, the concerns that have been noted and usually immediately dismissed, such as the greater risk for abuse and negligence that homeschooling carries, isn't that why you get questions? People want to know your child won't be behind. I mean, sure, there are some who will clearly disdain you, but to say that all people who question are ill-spirited is rather ignorant and, to be completely honest, not especially Christian. I thought that meant caring about your fellow man, which probably includes making sure kids are brought up right in the community, but I might be wrong, I'm just Catholic.
Furthermore, I'd like to note that I went to public school, and though sure, it was filled with peril at times, it wasn't something I would never let my child near as some of you are painting it. If there's something wrong with the school in your community, do something about it! Change it! We live in a democracy, as they taught me in public school, and that means everyone gets a say. Homeschooling your child just because your local schools are deplorable is like not voting. It doesn't solve anything and silences your voice.
3.29.2011 | 11:47pm
Bop says:
@Maria:
You make me feel all chastened and rather wishing I had gone to school where you went to school. May God bless you.
You make me feel all chastened and rather wishing I had gone to school where you went to school. May God bless you.
3.29.2011 | 11:56pm
David Mills says:
The contradiction between Maria's and Advanced Placement's criticisms of homeschoolers for (as they consider) opting out of the public school system -- AP's condemning Maria's and Maria's condeming AP's just as much as botht condemn homeschooling -- suggests the problems with that argument. They blame the homeschooler for not supporting their particular cause. There's the authoritarian mind at work.
The homeschooler isn't responsible for supporting anyone else's particular cause. He's responsible for raising his children as best he can, and that does not include sacrificing them to someone else's idea of the good. Especially when that idea is so naive, as is AP's idea of "democracy."
In any case, to appeal to authority, the Diocese of Pittsburgh does not endorse either's blanket assertions. See its *Faith Education in the Home* (www.diopitt.org/education/faith.htm) for a useful description of Catholic homeschooling.
The homeschooler isn't responsible for supporting anyone else's particular cause. He's responsible for raising his children as best he can, and that does not include sacrificing them to someone else's idea of the good. Especially when that idea is so naive, as is AP's idea of "democracy."
In any case, to appeal to authority, the Diocese of Pittsburgh does not endorse either's blanket assertions. See its *Faith Education in the Home* (www.diopitt.org/education/faith.htm) for a useful description of Catholic homeschooling.
3.30.2011 | 1:58am
Willa says:
Though their primary responsibility is to the education of their own children, families who choose to homeschool do contribute to the cause of education in general, by showing a viable alternative path and smoothing that path for others. I know I was greatly encouraged by meeting strong homeschooling families when I was first trying to decide what to do about my kids' education, and other homeschoolers (and other supportive people in my community) really made a difference to my efforts.
Plus, homeschooled children themselves generally grow up to be successful adults with a lively civic and educational involvement who bring up strong families of their own, thus again benefiting society as a whole.
The Catholic principle of subsidiarity holds that the larger, less organic organization should provide for the smaller one only what the smaller one is unable to provide for itself. So it is really the schools who have the responsibility to encourage and support families; not vice versa. Some schools (public and private) do make this effort and thus bring together communities where the energy and commitment of homeschoolers is valued rather than distrusted.
Plus, homeschooled children themselves generally grow up to be successful adults with a lively civic and educational involvement who bring up strong families of their own, thus again benefiting society as a whole.
The Catholic principle of subsidiarity holds that the larger, less organic organization should provide for the smaller one only what the smaller one is unable to provide for itself. So it is really the schools who have the responsibility to encourage and support families; not vice versa. Some schools (public and private) do make this effort and thus bring together communities where the energy and commitment of homeschoolers is valued rather than distrusted.
3.30.2011 | 2:32am
Taylor says:
Just another home-schooled student putting in her two cents.
In response to more than one person's concern voiced here, I would have to admit that homeschooling can be just as dysfunctional as public schooling. Depending on the attitude with which parents approach their children's education, socialization, quality and breadth of curriculum, and preparation for normal life can be an issue. But out of all the homeschooling families in my acquaintance, such a description applies to one, maybe two.
My siblings and I never actually had a problem at all with socialization. I'm a bit reserved by personality; my other four siblings not at all: the "reserved" accusation is not something you can automatically throw at homeschoolers and leave it as that. Several of my close friends who did stay in public school from grade school on up were reserved by personality and graduated practically unable to function normally for years in several cases (ever wonder where the goth and emo movements came from?), or in others, simply had really miserable teen years filled with bullying.
The kids in my family have all had jobs in the community since early high school; been involved in school sports, youth ministry, drama, music, etc. And in all of these contexts--at the risk of sounding a bit self-important here--we've gotten nothing but compliments, advancement, and have consistently come off better than our peers from public school. Currently I'm graduating college with the only 4.0 in my class, and have been accepted to several grad schools (Boston College being my final choice). But as it happens I'm not actually going to grad school yet: I've also got a Fulbright scholarship to study in Belgium for a year. My sister is at the same school, and is heavily involved in the drama department, several clubs, and Ultimate frisbee, not to mention being one of the go-to people for student ambassadoring. Hardly "socially inept" or educationally deficient.
Certainly, homeschooling should never be held up as the only way to go for a good Christian family. There are plenty of good Catholic or even secular private schools out there that can provide a fantastic education. People who assert that families have a duty to send their children out into the schools to be good examples and give back to the community are missing several major points, however.
a.) In many places in this (very large) nation, there are no private schools. Or at least none that teach past eighth grade. There seems to be some consensus that this prior-to-high school time is precisely the most appropriate one for homeschooling, so why go that direction, especially when you consider that besides being (often) educationally inferior, these parochial schools are far too expensive for what they're offering.
b.) Why is childhood the only time to give back to your community? Sure, my siblings and I could have gone to school and done pretty well, and perhaps while we weren't having to deal with the bullies, drug-dealers, and cliques that are so rife in central Maine (from school parents' universal testimony and our own experience in sports), we might have had the occasional opportunity to, I don't know, proselytize or object to abortion. Compare that to the opportunities we'll have now, with the gigantic advantage of a solid education behind us, to go back to the community and do something. Something a bit more influential than the public high schoolers who all ended up at Kennebec Valley Community College.
c.) Personality is a big consideration. Some kids are probably going to benefit from the structure of a school environment. Others won't. The most important idea backing freedom in education is that parents know their kids better than other people do. If your kid will do well in school, fine. If, like me, they find that a classroom structure in which an "A" is something anyone can achieve completely sinks their motivation to put real work into an assignment (let me repeat: in many schools an A is just too easy to get), then they probably shouldn't be going to school. There's no cookie-cutter answer. All kids are different, and parents should be able to discern that difference and help their children to fulfill their potential by any means necessary.
And that brings me to my final point:
d.) Is the simple fact that some people misuse homeschooling enough to say that the idea is wrong? That it shouldn't be legal? That one should immediately grill homeschooling parents out of a misplaced sense of "having authority" over other people's children? Let me mention, though the analogy is an imperfect one, a certain "misuse" of the priesthood that was rife in the Church several decades ago. Or more pertinently, the fact that within the last five years alone, four teachers at the schools in my own small town were convicted of molesting children. Convicted; the accusations are much more widespread. The statistical evidence points unavoidably to the fact that children become objects of abuse far more often outside the home than in. Of course, there could be many explanations for those statistics, and any abuse is going to be primarily prevented by good parents paying attention to what's going on in their children's lives. But to insinuate that the simple fact that a family has decided to educate their children at home somehow makes them prime suspects in a theoretical child abuse case is insulting and uninformed. Are we really saying that parents who send their children to school are somehow incapable of abuse? Because again, there are several examples to the contrary just within my hometown.
In response to more than one person's concern voiced here, I would have to admit that homeschooling can be just as dysfunctional as public schooling. Depending on the attitude with which parents approach their children's education, socialization, quality and breadth of curriculum, and preparation for normal life can be an issue. But out of all the homeschooling families in my acquaintance, such a description applies to one, maybe two.
My siblings and I never actually had a problem at all with socialization. I'm a bit reserved by personality; my other four siblings not at all: the "reserved" accusation is not something you can automatically throw at homeschoolers and leave it as that. Several of my close friends who did stay in public school from grade school on up were reserved by personality and graduated practically unable to function normally for years in several cases (ever wonder where the goth and emo movements came from?), or in others, simply had really miserable teen years filled with bullying.
The kids in my family have all had jobs in the community since early high school; been involved in school sports, youth ministry, drama, music, etc. And in all of these contexts--at the risk of sounding a bit self-important here--we've gotten nothing but compliments, advancement, and have consistently come off better than our peers from public school. Currently I'm graduating college with the only 4.0 in my class, and have been accepted to several grad schools (Boston College being my final choice). But as it happens I'm not actually going to grad school yet: I've also got a Fulbright scholarship to study in Belgium for a year. My sister is at the same school, and is heavily involved in the drama department, several clubs, and Ultimate frisbee, not to mention being one of the go-to people for student ambassadoring. Hardly "socially inept" or educationally deficient.
Certainly, homeschooling should never be held up as the only way to go for a good Christian family. There are plenty of good Catholic or even secular private schools out there that can provide a fantastic education. People who assert that families have a duty to send their children out into the schools to be good examples and give back to the community are missing several major points, however.
a.) In many places in this (very large) nation, there are no private schools. Or at least none that teach past eighth grade. There seems to be some consensus that this prior-to-high school time is precisely the most appropriate one for homeschooling, so why go that direction, especially when you consider that besides being (often) educationally inferior, these parochial schools are far too expensive for what they're offering.
b.) Why is childhood the only time to give back to your community? Sure, my siblings and I could have gone to school and done pretty well, and perhaps while we weren't having to deal with the bullies, drug-dealers, and cliques that are so rife in central Maine (from school parents' universal testimony and our own experience in sports), we might have had the occasional opportunity to, I don't know, proselytize or object to abortion. Compare that to the opportunities we'll have now, with the gigantic advantage of a solid education behind us, to go back to the community and do something. Something a bit more influential than the public high schoolers who all ended up at Kennebec Valley Community College.
c.) Personality is a big consideration. Some kids are probably going to benefit from the structure of a school environment. Others won't. The most important idea backing freedom in education is that parents know their kids better than other people do. If your kid will do well in school, fine. If, like me, they find that a classroom structure in which an "A" is something anyone can achieve completely sinks their motivation to put real work into an assignment (let me repeat: in many schools an A is just too easy to get), then they probably shouldn't be going to school. There's no cookie-cutter answer. All kids are different, and parents should be able to discern that difference and help their children to fulfill their potential by any means necessary.
And that brings me to my final point:
d.) Is the simple fact that some people misuse homeschooling enough to say that the idea is wrong? That it shouldn't be legal? That one should immediately grill homeschooling parents out of a misplaced sense of "having authority" over other people's children? Let me mention, though the analogy is an imperfect one, a certain "misuse" of the priesthood that was rife in the Church several decades ago. Or more pertinently, the fact that within the last five years alone, four teachers at the schools in my own small town were convicted of molesting children. Convicted; the accusations are much more widespread. The statistical evidence points unavoidably to the fact that children become objects of abuse far more often outside the home than in. Of course, there could be many explanations for those statistics, and any abuse is going to be primarily prevented by good parents paying attention to what's going on in their children's lives. But to insinuate that the simple fact that a family has decided to educate their children at home somehow makes them prime suspects in a theoretical child abuse case is insulting and uninformed. Are we really saying that parents who send their children to school are somehow incapable of abuse? Because again, there are several examples to the contrary just within my hometown.
3.30.2011 | 10:48am
Bop says:
@David Mills:
“They (Maria and Advanced Placement’s) blame the homeschooler for not supporting their particular cause. There's the authoritarian mind at work.
The homeschooler isn't responsible for supporting anyone else's particular cause. He's responsible for raising his children as best he can, and that does not include sacrificing them to someone else's idea of the good. Especially when that idea is so naive, as is AP's idea of "democracy."
So all the great social, cultural and political movements, developments and historical formations of order are to be reduced to so many “causes” to which an individual may choose to recognize or reject?
This neighbour, so this reduction goes, needs to work, and to feed and educate his children: well, those are his “causes,” not mine. My natural rights extend as far as I can extend them, naturally, but my natural obligations stop in my family, where, incidentally, guess whose authoritarian mind is chief? How ironic that the deformed offspring of the Enlightenment are so clueless as to their real parentage.
But the Church’s social teaching has always challenged such a debasing hermeneutic of “freedom” and individual rights by offering her own hermeneutic of obligation. In her eyes, there are no such things as positive individual rights, there are only positive individual obligations. A man will be judged not on how he executes his “rights” but how he fulfills his obligations to others. That others fail in their obligations to him is neither here nor there when it comes to judging him.
Certainly a man is obligated to his own children, but he is also obligated to other men’s children. And to sacrifice other men’s children on account of his own, is not a “cause” to be proud of.
“They (Maria and Advanced Placement’s) blame the homeschooler for not supporting their particular cause. There's the authoritarian mind at work.
The homeschooler isn't responsible for supporting anyone else's particular cause. He's responsible for raising his children as best he can, and that does not include sacrificing them to someone else's idea of the good. Especially when that idea is so naive, as is AP's idea of "democracy."
So all the great social, cultural and political movements, developments and historical formations of order are to be reduced to so many “causes” to which an individual may choose to recognize or reject?
This neighbour, so this reduction goes, needs to work, and to feed and educate his children: well, those are his “causes,” not mine. My natural rights extend as far as I can extend them, naturally, but my natural obligations stop in my family, where, incidentally, guess whose authoritarian mind is chief? How ironic that the deformed offspring of the Enlightenment are so clueless as to their real parentage.
But the Church’s social teaching has always challenged such a debasing hermeneutic of “freedom” and individual rights by offering her own hermeneutic of obligation. In her eyes, there are no such things as positive individual rights, there are only positive individual obligations. A man will be judged not on how he executes his “rights” but how he fulfills his obligations to others. That others fail in their obligations to him is neither here nor there when it comes to judging him.
Certainly a man is obligated to his own children, but he is also obligated to other men’s children. And to sacrifice other men’s children on account of his own, is not a “cause” to be proud of.
3.30.2011 | 11:41am
Maria P says:
I guess because I choose to not make my children be the test subjects of vaccine studies that I am not contributing to the greater good either.
Oh bother.
Oh bother.
3.30.2011 | 11:44am
David Meyer says:
I homeschool my 4 kids. A HUGE issue in the homeschool/Christian school debate is socialization. This cannot be underestimated!!!! Kids can be harmed if this issue is not taken into account.
So, all you people sending your kids to schools, watch out! Sitting your kid in a room with 30 other people their same age and making them find their place in a pecking order they will never again experience in their life is damaging! In my experience, homeschool kids can "relate to adults" far better that the clicky schooled counterparts and recieve a far better, more balanced, and tailor made education. Socialization is a problem... but not for homeschoolers. Ask the public school goth kids that cry themselves to sleep each night and slash their wrists. "Socialization" was a big problem for them.
Like the author of this post, I too am nausiated by the constant refrian of people so "concerned" about MY kids socialization. Their kids are listening to gangsta rap and putting condoms on bannanas at their "socialized" school.... but they are worried about my kids... how touching.
So, all you people sending your kids to schools, watch out! Sitting your kid in a room with 30 other people their same age and making them find their place in a pecking order they will never again experience in their life is damaging! In my experience, homeschool kids can "relate to adults" far better that the clicky schooled counterparts and recieve a far better, more balanced, and tailor made education. Socialization is a problem... but not for homeschoolers. Ask the public school goth kids that cry themselves to sleep each night and slash their wrists. "Socialization" was a big problem for them.
Like the author of this post, I too am nausiated by the constant refrian of people so "concerned" about MY kids socialization. Their kids are listening to gangsta rap and putting condoms on bannanas at their "socialized" school.... but they are worried about my kids... how touching.
3.30.2011 | 1:12pm
A Mom says:
@David Meyer
Just to say, I love, and completely agree with what you wrote.
This hits it entirely:
Socialization is a problem...but not for homeschoolers.
Just to say, I love, and completely agree with what you wrote.
This hits it entirely:
Socialization is a problem...but not for homeschoolers.
3.30.2011 | 1:51pm
David Mills says:
*Bop*: It's very difficult to respond to you, bec. your misconstrual of others' arguments would take too much trouble to untangle. But here, since you insist on being ad hominem as well as confusing: I hardly reduced "all the great social, cultural and political movements" to "causes," but only pointed out that the two respondents insisted categorically that others do what they wanted in regard to schooling, and that they contradicted each other in what they insisted others do, and that this suggested the limits of such arguments.
As for the rest, in which you project on my observation something I in no way said, is just silly. One can recognize the mutual obligations the Catholic Church describes while not believing in your or anyone else's way of meeting them. There is, as the Church herself recognizes, a hierarchy in these obligations, and the obligation of a parent to his children goes before his to others' children. That's his primary job in the society in which he lives.
It is perfectly possible, and rational, and altruistic, to believe that by raising one's children in a way that people like you seem to think is selfish, that one will meet those mutual obligations more effectively and more faithfully than otherwise. There are good arguments to be made for this, which some respondents have made. To claim that the position is just the product of some unconscious submission to the Enlightenment isn't intellectually serious.
As for the rest, in which you project on my observation something I in no way said, is just silly. One can recognize the mutual obligations the Catholic Church describes while not believing in your or anyone else's way of meeting them. There is, as the Church herself recognizes, a hierarchy in these obligations, and the obligation of a parent to his children goes before his to others' children. That's his primary job in the society in which he lives.
It is perfectly possible, and rational, and altruistic, to believe that by raising one's children in a way that people like you seem to think is selfish, that one will meet those mutual obligations more effectively and more faithfully than otherwise. There are good arguments to be made for this, which some respondents have made. To claim that the position is just the product of some unconscious submission to the Enlightenment isn't intellectually serious.
3.30.2011 | 2:00pm
Kellee says:
I love reading the comments. From the tongue in cheeck to the serious. Many of those that were homeschooled as kids write wonderful testimonies to the practice. I have had the question by many people about socialization and find that most do really want to understand even if they have ideas of their own they want to share (even when they sound like they are lecturing you, they dont want to feel like you are putting their decision down...it is a hard and fine line to walk). I also find that by sharing my experience homeschooling for the last 13 years I help to broaden peoples understanding of what we do. The amount of activities and academics out there for homeschoolers is overwhelming...and that is a good thing. My kids have had the opportunity to work with adults, teach younger kids, learn from older kids and pace themselves depnding on how easy or hard a subject is for them. I am there to point out times when they can help or when something goes wrong, we can talk about how to handle it.
To me, the best reasons to homeschool are often found, unintentionally, in college graduates letters to "Dear Abby" types (and I am sure in other places). They often explain how school was so comsuming they didnt get a job or they didnt learn how to cook or clean or do laundry or stock a pantry or whatever. And they didnt have free time or outside hobbies to work into life. Their lives were so scheduled they didnt learn how to budget their time. My goal is raise kids who can live a life where they know how to have fun, participate in hobbies, participate in family activites and do their work/school all at the same time. I want them to have the practical skills that you cant learn if you are never home. My kids have learnd how to handle many situations with me there in case the needed help. They have learned to interact with people of varying ages and religions. They have the time to pursue passions, do activities without worry of what is going on tomorrow in school that trumps an activity when the activity should trump the school stuff. My children and my husband and I know what they kids need. The older they get, the more involved they are in planning and arranging their schedules and their class work. It is a gradual process which has been shown to really help homeschool children transition from childhood to adulthood and all the responibilities that go with it.
My other comment is to reiterate that there is not a perfect solution for any person. Our society should have choices. But to say that registering can keep abuse from happening in homeschool families is just plain ignorant. I can site many instances where kids who were in public school were abused and killed or where they were bullied horrifically and became suicidal (I have helped many people start homeschooling when the public and private/parochial schools failed to protect or help their kids) or where parents were told their kids would never learn to read of get beyond a first or second grade level academically and the kids went on to live on their own or even go to college. A parent should have the right, without intereference from a government entity that was created to provide a service, not oversee a monoply, to school ther child as they see fit and to teach that child the morals and the values they believe in.
To me, the best reasons to homeschool are often found, unintentionally, in college graduates letters to "Dear Abby" types (and I am sure in other places). They often explain how school was so comsuming they didnt get a job or they didnt learn how to cook or clean or do laundry or stock a pantry or whatever. And they didnt have free time or outside hobbies to work into life. Their lives were so scheduled they didnt learn how to budget their time. My goal is raise kids who can live a life where they know how to have fun, participate in hobbies, participate in family activites and do their work/school all at the same time. I want them to have the practical skills that you cant learn if you are never home. My kids have learnd how to handle many situations with me there in case the needed help. They have learned to interact with people of varying ages and religions. They have the time to pursue passions, do activities without worry of what is going on tomorrow in school that trumps an activity when the activity should trump the school stuff. My children and my husband and I know what they kids need. The older they get, the more involved they are in planning and arranging their schedules and their class work. It is a gradual process which has been shown to really help homeschool children transition from childhood to adulthood and all the responibilities that go with it.
My other comment is to reiterate that there is not a perfect solution for any person. Our society should have choices. But to say that registering can keep abuse from happening in homeschool families is just plain ignorant. I can site many instances where kids who were in public school were abused and killed or where they were bullied horrifically and became suicidal (I have helped many people start homeschooling when the public and private/parochial schools failed to protect or help their kids) or where parents were told their kids would never learn to read of get beyond a first or second grade level academically and the kids went on to live on their own or even go to college. A parent should have the right, without intereference from a government entity that was created to provide a service, not oversee a monoply, to school ther child as they see fit and to teach that child the morals and the values they believe in.
3.30.2011 | 4:25pm
Bop says:
Mr. Mills:
I was not trying to deliberately misconstrue your arguments; why would I try to do that when everyone else can read your arguments for themselves?
What I was trying to do was describe how they struck me. I was trying to describe how I understood what you were saying, not just with respect to the single position you hold on homeschooling, but with respect to the attitudinal and intellectual disposition that would hold to such a position with such arguments as you brought forth. And if you do find it difficult to respond to me, I would suggest that the difficulty lies not in untangling my misconstruction of your arguments, but in recognizing that we may operate from different sets of unstated assumptions, and that before one can properly understand and respond to the other, one must first unearth what these unstated assumptions are. Tedious, I know, but the alternative is that you end up talking to one of two audiences: to those others who share the same assumptions, but who are as equally unaware as you that they do, or to those others “whose criticisms seem to be” to you, you just have to say, “uniformly weak.”
Do you not find it unremarkable, Mr. Mills, that one such as you, who can as well be a child’s formal teacher at the same time as you can be his parent, should have no difficulty in passionately arguing for a case while at the same time dispassionately judging that those who argue against you are uniformly weak in their arguments?
But take how you misconstrue and treat the respondent Maria. You say that she “insisted categorically that others do what she wanted in regard to schooling.” Yet I have read her comments a number of times now and I cannot point to one thing that she insisted anyone do. Let alone one thing that she “categorically insisted” anyone do. All that I see that she has done is to state her own view, her own reason for holding her view, and to have asked a series of pertinent questions that you have not deigned to recognize, let alone to give some answer to. But perhaps I am wrong. Perhaps she has insistently demanded that others do as she had done and perhaps you will show me? And then maybe I’ll see something that as yet remains unstated to me. Or to you.
Here are her comments, for your ease of reference:
I send my children to Catholic school and I appalled by the disregard for institutions of the homeschooling movement. The Western Tradition is a celebration of civilized life over tribal structures, tribal structures like homeschooling. A decent education marks the evolution of custom into law and association into institution. Why it is enough to improve education for merely your own children? Why don't you feel a call to improve Catholic education for as many children as possible? Making a Catholic school a place of financial stability and academic excellence requires the labor and devotion of an active parent community. Why do homeschoolers feel so comfortable opting out of the cultural imperative to support, celebrate and improve Catholic schools? I don't question their liberty or their children's socialization. I object to their absence from the Catholic school system.
I was not trying to deliberately misconstrue your arguments; why would I try to do that when everyone else can read your arguments for themselves?
What I was trying to do was describe how they struck me. I was trying to describe how I understood what you were saying, not just with respect to the single position you hold on homeschooling, but with respect to the attitudinal and intellectual disposition that would hold to such a position with such arguments as you brought forth. And if you do find it difficult to respond to me, I would suggest that the difficulty lies not in untangling my misconstruction of your arguments, but in recognizing that we may operate from different sets of unstated assumptions, and that before one can properly understand and respond to the other, one must first unearth what these unstated assumptions are. Tedious, I know, but the alternative is that you end up talking to one of two audiences: to those others who share the same assumptions, but who are as equally unaware as you that they do, or to those others “whose criticisms seem to be” to you, you just have to say, “uniformly weak.”
Do you not find it unremarkable, Mr. Mills, that one such as you, who can as well be a child’s formal teacher at the same time as you can be his parent, should have no difficulty in passionately arguing for a case while at the same time dispassionately judging that those who argue against you are uniformly weak in their arguments?
But take how you misconstrue and treat the respondent Maria. You say that she “insisted categorically that others do what she wanted in regard to schooling.” Yet I have read her comments a number of times now and I cannot point to one thing that she insisted anyone do. Let alone one thing that she “categorically insisted” anyone do. All that I see that she has done is to state her own view, her own reason for holding her view, and to have asked a series of pertinent questions that you have not deigned to recognize, let alone to give some answer to. But perhaps I am wrong. Perhaps she has insistently demanded that others do as she had done and perhaps you will show me? And then maybe I’ll see something that as yet remains unstated to me. Or to you.
Here are her comments, for your ease of reference:
I send my children to Catholic school and I appalled by the disregard for institutions of the homeschooling movement. The Western Tradition is a celebration of civilized life over tribal structures, tribal structures like homeschooling. A decent education marks the evolution of custom into law and association into institution. Why it is enough to improve education for merely your own children? Why don't you feel a call to improve Catholic education for as many children as possible? Making a Catholic school a place of financial stability and academic excellence requires the labor and devotion of an active parent community. Why do homeschoolers feel so comfortable opting out of the cultural imperative to support, celebrate and improve Catholic schools? I don't question their liberty or their children's socialization. I object to their absence from the Catholic school system.
3.30.2011 | 4:42pm
pentamom says:
I find it interesting that the worst criticisms of homeschooling, even when overblown, don't seem to come out any worse that "the same bad things sometimes happen in homeschooling as in public schooling."
Abuse? Check. Poor education? Check. Poor social skills? Check.
So if the worst that can be thrown at homeschooling is that sometimes it is just as bad as the worst things that happen in public schooling, how does that actually work as anti-homeschooling criticism? Maybe people should just chill and let people decide what works best for their own families without feeling the need to point out the potential dangers, which are apparently no worse than the potential dangers of their own preferred method.
Abuse? Check. Poor education? Check. Poor social skills? Check.
So if the worst that can be thrown at homeschooling is that sometimes it is just as bad as the worst things that happen in public schooling, how does that actually work as anti-homeschooling criticism? Maybe people should just chill and let people decide what works best for their own families without feeling the need to point out the potential dangers, which are apparently no worse than the potential dangers of their own preferred method.
3.30.2011 | 4:55pm
David Mills says:
*Bop*: But you weren't doing what you now claim you were doing. You were making flat declarations about what I and others were (supposedly) doing. There was none of the reticence you now claim. We all know about unstated assumptions etc. etc., and so on and so on, but they're not the issue here.
As for my judgement of Maria's argument, her closing "I object to their absence from the Catholic school system" is sufficient proof, esp. after what do seem to be a series of rhetorical questions. She believes it is wrong not to send your children to Catholic schools and doesn't even suggest she accepts an alternative.
As for my judgement of Maria's argument, her closing "I object to their absence from the Catholic school system" is sufficient proof, esp. after what do seem to be a series of rhetorical questions. She believes it is wrong not to send your children to Catholic schools and doesn't even suggest she accepts an alternative.
3.30.2011 | 8:04pm
Suzie Andres says:
Terri Aquilina and I were interviewed this morning on Sirius XM Catholic Radio by Greg and Jennifer Willits for their show, "The Catholics Next Door."
The topic was our new book (written with the help of eleven other homeschooling mothers and two homeschooling fathers) "A Little Way of Homeschooling."
We were all enjoying the conversation, so during a break Greg and Jennifer asked Terri and I if we would be willing to continue the interview longer than originally scheduled, and allow listeners to call in with questions. We said, "Sure."
Wouldn't you know the first caller asked, "What about socialization?"
Thanks David, and all who are commenting here, for preparing me to answer that question! I laughingly mentioned that quite the discussion on that very topic was happening at first things in response to David's article, and then I answered the question. My only concern during the interview was that I was talking too long (the questioner had also asked about homeschoolers' participation in sports) because there are so very many opportunities for homeschool socialization, and I wanted to include as many as I could in my reply to the caller.
Enjoying everyone's contributions,
Suzie
The topic was our new book (written with the help of eleven other homeschooling mothers and two homeschooling fathers) "A Little Way of Homeschooling."
We were all enjoying the conversation, so during a break Greg and Jennifer asked Terri and I if we would be willing to continue the interview longer than originally scheduled, and allow listeners to call in with questions. We said, "Sure."
Wouldn't you know the first caller asked, "What about socialization?"
Thanks David, and all who are commenting here, for preparing me to answer that question! I laughingly mentioned that quite the discussion on that very topic was happening at first things in response to David's article, and then I answered the question. My only concern during the interview was that I was talking too long (the questioner had also asked about homeschoolers' participation in sports) because there are so very many opportunities for homeschool socialization, and I wanted to include as many as I could in my reply to the caller.
Enjoying everyone's contributions,
Suzie
4.2.2011 | 1:55am
Dagmar Smoking says:
Furthermore, I'd like to note that I went to public school, and though sure, it was filled with peril at times, it wasn't something I would never let my child near as some of you are painting it. If there's something wrong with the school in your community, do something about it! Change it! We live in a democracy, as they taught me in public school, and that means everyone gets a say. Homeschooling your child just because your local schools are deplorable is like not voting. It doesn't solve anything and silences your voice. When I've been asked, as a homeschooler, about socialization, I usually answer, "Well, my children are able to coherently communicate with adults in Walmart. What more do we need?"
4.4.2011 | 5:02pm
Advanced Placement says:
Um, no, David Mills, that's not it.
"Why it is enough to improve education for merely your own children? Why don't you feel a call to improve Catholic education for as many children as possible?"
THESE are the people Maria's looking down upon. The people who I also scorned in my earlier comment's last paragraph, the people who homeschool solely because the normal schools in their area are below average. She's objecting that those people are abandoning the system ("I object to THEIR absence from the Catholic school system") solely because they don't want to have to deal with trying to fix it. That's not a valid reason to homeschool and will certainly cause people to look down on you. I really don't have any problem with homeschoolers- my cousins were homeschooled, and we all get along swell- but the laziness behind that particular reason is unacceptable.
Also, David Meyers...
"So, all you people sending your kids to schools, watch out! Sitting your kid in a room with 30 other people their same age and making them find their place in a pecking order they will never again experience in their life is damaging!"
Wait, they'll never again experience finding their place in a pecking order? Sir, have you ever worked with people in any aspect? Clearly you haven't, otherwise you would realize that interworkplace communications tend to be all too similar to schoolroom banter. Just because the maturity level's increased doesn't mean that the situation is any different. And yes, it can be damaging, but kids usually come out stronger because of it, knowing how to deal with that. If it's not the right way for your kid to learn, then that's fine, homeschooling is a good alternative.
"Like the author of this post, I too am nausiated by the constant refrian of people so "concerned" about MY kids socialization. Their kids are listening to gangsta rap and putting condoms on bannanas at their "socialized" school.... but they are worried about my kids... how touching. "
OH NO! THEY'RE LEARNING HOW TO HAVE SAFE SEX! HIDE YO KIDS, HIDE YO WIFE, HIDE YO HUSBAND, 'CAUSE DEY LEARNING HOW TO PREVENT TEEN PREGNANCY OUT DERE!
And let me count how many times I listened to a "gangsta rap" at public school... oh let me think, this is a hard one... oh, right, it was NONE. That's a parenting issue, not a schooling one.
Also, it's spelled, "nauseating." You're concerned about your kids' socialization. Your kids own the socialization, therefore an apostrophe must be in place.
And for all you homeschoolers, you know what would make a great exercise? Having your kids respond to some of the arguments on here, as others have done. Improving argumentative skills can be done anywhere, and I must say I do enjoy the conversation here, as it's an interesting issue.
"Why it is enough to improve education for merely your own children? Why don't you feel a call to improve Catholic education for as many children as possible?"
THESE are the people Maria's looking down upon. The people who I also scorned in my earlier comment's last paragraph, the people who homeschool solely because the normal schools in their area are below average. She's objecting that those people are abandoning the system ("I object to THEIR absence from the Catholic school system") solely because they don't want to have to deal with trying to fix it. That's not a valid reason to homeschool and will certainly cause people to look down on you. I really don't have any problem with homeschoolers- my cousins were homeschooled, and we all get along swell- but the laziness behind that particular reason is unacceptable.
Also, David Meyers...
"So, all you people sending your kids to schools, watch out! Sitting your kid in a room with 30 other people their same age and making them find their place in a pecking order they will never again experience in their life is damaging!"
Wait, they'll never again experience finding their place in a pecking order? Sir, have you ever worked with people in any aspect? Clearly you haven't, otherwise you would realize that interworkplace communications tend to be all too similar to schoolroom banter. Just because the maturity level's increased doesn't mean that the situation is any different. And yes, it can be damaging, but kids usually come out stronger because of it, knowing how to deal with that. If it's not the right way for your kid to learn, then that's fine, homeschooling is a good alternative.
"Like the author of this post, I too am nausiated by the constant refrian of people so "concerned" about MY kids socialization. Their kids are listening to gangsta rap and putting condoms on bannanas at their "socialized" school.... but they are worried about my kids... how touching. "
OH NO! THEY'RE LEARNING HOW TO HAVE SAFE SEX! HIDE YO KIDS, HIDE YO WIFE, HIDE YO HUSBAND, 'CAUSE DEY LEARNING HOW TO PREVENT TEEN PREGNANCY OUT DERE!
And let me count how many times I listened to a "gangsta rap" at public school... oh let me think, this is a hard one... oh, right, it was NONE. That's a parenting issue, not a schooling one.
Also, it's spelled, "nauseating." You're concerned about your kids' socialization. Your kids own the socialization, therefore an apostrophe must be in place.
And for all you homeschoolers, you know what would make a great exercise? Having your kids respond to some of the arguments on here, as others have done. Improving argumentative skills can be done anywhere, and I must say I do enjoy the conversation here, as it's an interesting issue.
1.1.2012 | 11:36am
Annasher says:
A parent who fails to teach their children is a failure to those children. This article is incredibly accurate and validating. The comment that teacher and parent should not meet is by far one of the most (may be the most) ignorant statements I have heard in the discussion of extra-docere education.
1.1.2012 | 11:40am
Veronica says:
@Advanced Placement-
My home schooled students having been instructed in classical logic would not dignify your caustic illogical comments with the engagement if argument.
My home schooled students having been instructed in classical logic would not dignify your caustic illogical comments with the engagement if argument.
Fr. Philip Neri, OP