The Freedom to Homeschool
August 17, 2012
Matthew Hennessey
“It’s a free country.” You used to hear that a lot. Mind if I have the last piece of pie? “It’s a free country.” Mind if I smoke? “It’s a free country.”
Too bad it has receded from everyday lingo, replaced by the ubiquitous, meaningless, “Whatever.” Something has been lost. “It’s a free country” was more than just whatever, it was, “Yeah, I mind. But I ain’t gonna stop you.” Isn’t that where the rubber hits the road in a truly free society?
My wife homeschools our oldest daughter. We are among the relatively few American families to exercise this freedom. According to the National Home Education Research Institute, only about 2 million of the roughly 55 million school-age students in the United States are educated in the home. While we do it for mostly personal reasons, we are keenly aware that the practice is viewed by many (if not most) as a political act. As such, it is a contingent and precarious freedom. A sudden shift in the political atmosphere could imperil our right to educate our children at home. Gun owners have known this feeling for a long time. The Catholic Church became familiar with it recently.
In Spain, where my brother-in-law and his wife are raising two young boys, if you don’t send your kids to school at the age of six, you get a visit from the cops. While homeschooling is technically illegal in Spain, about 2,000 Spanish families have taken advantage of vague language in the Spanish Constitution to homeschool while the issue wends its way through the courts. The Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA), a U.S.-based advocacy group, reported last year that a shift in the Spanish political climate “has quickly gone from one of bureaucratic indifference to active hostility” toward homeschoolers. Daragh McInerney, president of La Asociación para la Libre Educación (ALE), the largest homeschool association in Spain, told HSLDA, “There are at least 25 families in Spain, that I am personally aware of, who are facing difficulties with the authorities over homeschooling.”
Do the Spanish live in a free country? I don’t know. They probably think they do. Compared to Saudi Arabia or China, Spain is practically a libertarian paradise, yet this capricious attitude of the government toward homeschooling seems to suggest otherwise.
“It’s a free country” may not continue to resonate with Americans for much longer either. As Obamacare’s individual mandate was predicated on the notion that costs incurred by an individual but borne by society necessitate government intervention, politicians in this country could easily be convinced—by, say, teachers unions—that homeschoolers are no different than the uninsured in the costs they impose on the rest of us. Doesn’t society suffer if kids aren’t being properly socialized? Don’t institutions suffer if children aren’t being properly educated into citizenship?
In fact, the argument is already being made. In a 2010 paper in the journal Philosophy and Public Policy Quarterly, Georgetown Law School professor Robin L. West characterized homeschooling families as a political “army,” whose objective “is to undermine, limit, or destroy state functions. . . Also sacrificed is their exposure to diverse ideas, cultures, and ways of being.” Others see homeschooling as a potential threat to public health; a 2008 USA Today article claimed that some families homeschool in order to avoid mandatory vaccinations.
Stanford University political scientist Rob Reich has argued that homeschooling should be strictly regulated both to ensure that children become good citizens and to prevent them from becoming “ethically servile,” or victims of their parents’ blinkered worldviews. His idea is founded on what he perversely calls the “freedom argument.” Of his proposed regulations requiring parents to check in with the state he writes, “The minimal standard will include academic benchmarks as well as an assurance that children are exposed to and engaged with ideas, values, and beliefs that are different from those of the parents.”
Reich and West would like to see parental rights subordinated to those of the child. They see unregulated education in the home—especially in the homes of religious believers—as insufficiently committed to diversity, secular progressivism’s cardinal virtue.
Earlier this year in a Slate article subtitled “Why teaching children at home violates progressive values,” journalist Dana Goldstein asked “Does homeschooling serve the interests not just of those who are doing it, but of society as a whole?” Like Reich and West, Goldstein cannot imagine homeschooling that doesn’t resemble involuntary confinement to a Wahhabi madrasah. But most homeschooling families I know make ample use of their scheduling freedom to pursue enriching and, yes, diverse opportunities: field trips to city halls and statehouses; substantive volunteer opportunities in hospitals, homeless shelters, and nursing homes, athletic contests, etc.
The progressive critics of homeschooling are less interested in promoting tolerance than they are in promoting compliance. It’s the freedom that bothers them, not what kids learn or how well they learn it. It’s about who decides. In other words—here as in Spain—it’s about politics. And it won’t be long before some enterprising American politician proposes a set of rules that would effectively deprive my family of its right to homeschool. This will come not as an outright ban on the practice but as an array of guidelines and edicts couched in the most unobjectionable terms—ensuring diversity, promoting responsible citizenship, safeguarding public health.
If the state appoints itself to guard against indoctrination by parents, who is to protect children from indoctrination by the state? Critics of homeschooling rarely grapple with this question for the likely reason that they are committed to a value system that is as uniform and intolerant in its own way as they imagine the value systems of American homeschoolers to be.
Forget broccoli. A government that can force you to buy health insurance can surely force children into the public school system. When that happens, will we still be a free country?
Whatever.
Matthew Hennessey is a writer and editor who lives in New Canaan, CT. You can follow him on Twitter @MattHennessey.
Become a fan of First Things on Facebook, subscribe to First Things via RSS, and follow First Things on Twitter.
Comments:
8.17.2012 | 5:17am
Michael PS says:
Few politicians are as frank as Jules Ferry, the founder of the modern French public school system, when he said “we want to cast the youth of the country in the same mould and stamp them, like the coinage, with the image of the Republic.”
Now, Ferry was no Left-winger. He was the minister of Thiers during the liquidation of the Paris Commune in 1871 and the theoretician of colonialism in Algeria. He was a ferocious bouffeur de curé [“Priest-eater” or anti-clerical]
Now, Ferry was no Left-winger. He was the minister of Thiers during the liquidation of the Paris Commune in 1871 and the theoretician of colonialism in Algeria. He was a ferocious bouffeur de curé [“Priest-eater” or anti-clerical]
8.17.2012 | 9:44am
maineman says:
Well said.
If/when the power play comes, as it already has with the H.H.S. mandate, then we will be faced, again, with the charge that, first and foremost, we must witness to the faith. If/when that happens, those of us who have done so will be free -- fined, jailed, or even martyred, but free.
Technically, all Catholics are now charged with homeschooling their children, just as we must witness to the faith by, say, leaving the room when sexually explicit television or movie material is on display. All public schools, and most private ones, are actively laboring to convert our children -- have been for a century now -- to a materialist faith and to worship the Pied Piper of decadence and nihilism that is implicit in their convoluted theology.
If Catholics were, in substantial numbers, to think, speak, and behave in concert with what we know is God's will, it would quickly become a free country again and the secular fundamentalists would be out on their ear before they knew what had happened.
As it is, I fear we will remain too silent for too long to prevent this cold war that they are waging against us from turning hot.
If/when the power play comes, as it already has with the H.H.S. mandate, then we will be faced, again, with the charge that, first and foremost, we must witness to the faith. If/when that happens, those of us who have done so will be free -- fined, jailed, or even martyred, but free.
Technically, all Catholics are now charged with homeschooling their children, just as we must witness to the faith by, say, leaving the room when sexually explicit television or movie material is on display. All public schools, and most private ones, are actively laboring to convert our children -- have been for a century now -- to a materialist faith and to worship the Pied Piper of decadence and nihilism that is implicit in their convoluted theology.
If Catholics were, in substantial numbers, to think, speak, and behave in concert with what we know is God's will, it would quickly become a free country again and the secular fundamentalists would be out on their ear before they knew what had happened.
As it is, I fear we will remain too silent for too long to prevent this cold war that they are waging against us from turning hot.
8.17.2012 | 10:20am
maineman says:
Rick, I believe the data on home schooling contradicts your hypothesis that, as a group, they are weaker socially or academically than children who are not educated at home.
Meanwhile, your isolated anecdote portrays a young woman who was most likely home-schooled, at least in large part, because of the social anxiety and social skill deficits that you observed. That is a very common phenomenon.
Meanwhile, your isolated anecdote portrays a young woman who was most likely home-schooled, at least in large part, because of the social anxiety and social skill deficits that you observed. That is a very common phenomenon.
8.17.2012 | 10:20am
The Moz says:
There is a totalitarian impulse on the Left that seems to be growing and that appears to not get much scrutiny. It doesn't bode well for democracy and for leftist politics. Eventual people begin to smell something rotten in Denmark and begin walking away. More and more people, centrists, are beginning to notice the whiff of serious intolerance coming straight from the Left and are rethinking their support.
8.17.2012 | 10:44am
Ben Embry says:
On first blush, I'm like Rick above who questions the alarmist strain in Mr. hennesey's article. But it is a possible scenario that, in the future, people become economic assets to the state system. Well, I guess its already this way in education in that schools receive federal monies on the basis of student enrollment and attendance. For this reason alone, the (usually placid) neighbors of homeschoolers are conditioned to see the activity of other children as either a detriment or a benefit to their own well-being.
There are live questions about the sustainability of government insurances like Social Security and medical care. As the demographics change (boomers get older, need lots of expensive medical help), along with changes in the ethics and values (like what Hennessey mentioned about the change in "it's a free country", along with changing views of, say, euthanasia, state intervention in reproduction, free enterprise, and even, even merely as a topic of conversation, the social obligations of Seven Eleven soda drinking) in the US, all people could well be cast as state assets or liabilities rather than as free responsible persons under the rule of self-government. In such a scenario, personal freedoms of all kinds would erode. And in a bum economy with state oversight of viable solutions, all the chips are in the state's hands and there is very little comfortable recourse against unwelcome state intervention in education.
Again, I do not see homeschooling today as a political act, like Hennessey suggests it is. But perhaps I'm wrong. right now, the scope of freedom is too broad for either the liberals or the conservatives. Liberals want to curb freedoms such as homeschooling. Conservatives want to curb things like sexual, um, application. As this struggle to decide who shall set the new, somewhat narrower, set of social and legal norms is played out, tides could change and the present educational landscape will change with it. And it seems like this is a "when" not "if" question.
There are live questions about the sustainability of government insurances like Social Security and medical care. As the demographics change (boomers get older, need lots of expensive medical help), along with changes in the ethics and values (like what Hennessey mentioned about the change in "it's a free country", along with changing views of, say, euthanasia, state intervention in reproduction, free enterprise, and even, even merely as a topic of conversation, the social obligations of Seven Eleven soda drinking) in the US, all people could well be cast as state assets or liabilities rather than as free responsible persons under the rule of self-government. In such a scenario, personal freedoms of all kinds would erode. And in a bum economy with state oversight of viable solutions, all the chips are in the state's hands and there is very little comfortable recourse against unwelcome state intervention in education.
Again, I do not see homeschooling today as a political act, like Hennessey suggests it is. But perhaps I'm wrong. right now, the scope of freedom is too broad for either the liberals or the conservatives. Liberals want to curb freedoms such as homeschooling. Conservatives want to curb things like sexual, um, application. As this struggle to decide who shall set the new, somewhat narrower, set of social and legal norms is played out, tides could change and the present educational landscape will change with it. And it seems like this is a "when" not "if" question.
8.17.2012 | 11:56am
Kari S says:
Rick, you're hilarious. If the public schools were turning out uniformly excellent scholars with virtuous character who were well-socialized, there would not be a homeschooling movement. Of course there are home schools that are poorly run and don't do a good job; the same is true of public schools. The point is that it should NOT be up to the government to decide how parents raise their children.
8.17.2012 | 12:00pm
William L Harnist says:
And how about the financial cost to the "government schools" imposed by homeschoolers. Here in Minnesota, the school district looses out on state aid for every child that is not enrolled in the the local school. That entails thousands of dollars per student per year(both homeschoolers and private school students).
8.17.2012 | 12:02pm
Diane says:
I'm not sure I follow your logic or even your reasons for writing this.
Because your family lives in Spain where home schooling is illegal, your right to home school your children might be in jeopardy because of a health mandate?
That is a stretch!
I have 3 children. They were schooled in a combination of a Catholic school and public school. Never home schooled because I realized I did not have the skills to do so. I was also a school nurse/ health educator and on the school board of 2 schools while my children were growing up. Took several education course and almost completed my MS in school counsel, but became disabled and had to stop.
There are several things I have to say. I have seen children excel because they were home schooled and children that did not know how to function in the world. Most states want to make sure the education home schooled children receive is comparable to a curriculum in the school district. Not because they are control freaks and after parents, but because education is important and all children should be able to pursue their dreams after high school, either by furthering their education or finding a job. All school curriculum should be focused on this and I believe it is the responsibility of school districts to make sure all children are educated. It is the parents job and responsibility to form their moral and religious education.
Catholic school is an option for many parents that are not satisfied with a public school education. Public schools present an educational opportunity for ALL children to be educated.
I saw my job as a parent to guide my children through childhood, not to shield them but to help them grow. There were things I did not like about public school, but no system is perfect.
My 3 children are grown now. They are functioning, contributing adults in society. Despite my best intentions, none of them are religious, despite attending Catholic schools.
Because your family lives in Spain where home schooling is illegal, your right to home school your children might be in jeopardy because of a health mandate?
That is a stretch!
I have 3 children. They were schooled in a combination of a Catholic school and public school. Never home schooled because I realized I did not have the skills to do so. I was also a school nurse/ health educator and on the school board of 2 schools while my children were growing up. Took several education course and almost completed my MS in school counsel, but became disabled and had to stop.
There are several things I have to say. I have seen children excel because they were home schooled and children that did not know how to function in the world. Most states want to make sure the education home schooled children receive is comparable to a curriculum in the school district. Not because they are control freaks and after parents, but because education is important and all children should be able to pursue their dreams after high school, either by furthering their education or finding a job. All school curriculum should be focused on this and I believe it is the responsibility of school districts to make sure all children are educated. It is the parents job and responsibility to form their moral and religious education.
Catholic school is an option for many parents that are not satisfied with a public school education. Public schools present an educational opportunity for ALL children to be educated.
I saw my job as a parent to guide my children through childhood, not to shield them but to help them grow. There were things I did not like about public school, but no system is perfect.
My 3 children are grown now. They are functioning, contributing adults in society. Despite my best intentions, none of them are religious, despite attending Catholic schools.
8.17.2012 | 12:22pm
Tame Shrew says:
Unfortunately, it is precisely views like those of Richard, above, that tell me it is very likely we will all be like frogs slowly cooked in the water before we realize it's too late. Good article, and it's not a big stretch. Not at all. I'm just not sure what to do about it. Richard, do you really think that there aren't public school kids who wouldn't cry over the same problem? No, they wouldn't do it at university level, because by then they would be calloused by having been ridiculed every day when they walked through the school doors. She would have spent all her tears in the public school bathroom already. This level of "un-socialization" is not worth welcoming "a little" government oversight. In our (non)religious climate, do you really think the gov. would NOT interfere too much?
8.17.2012 | 12:35pm
Steve S. says:
Thank you for reminding home educators not to take their current liberties for granted. Until the right of parents to educate their own children becomes a constitutional right, homeschoolers practice at the pleasure of the legislature.
A few comments, if I may.
- Although it is possible to assert that home schooling is damaging to children, it is VERY difficult to make a substantial, sustained argument based on hard data. Until home schoolers begin to lag behind their peers in conventional schools (public or private) in measurable areas such as test scores, literacy levels, and post-graduation employment, we're not likely to see anti-home-schooling issues gain much political traction.
- Compulsory schooling ages are currently established by states, not the federal government. Federal regulation of home schooling would almost necessarily entail a federal takeover of fifty state departments of education. While the health insurance mandate demonstrated that the federal government could, indeed intervene in matters that have normally been left to the states, it is still a difficult thing to accomplish politically.
- It's good for home educators to be subject to mild political attacks now and then. The only reason that home schooling is now legal across the country is that organizations like HSLDA and a host of similar groups from state to state have kept close watch on legislation and court cases that could affect them. They don't hesitate to make a lot of noise when some hapless senator suggests clamping down. There's nothing like the occasional political threat to keep a cause well-funded and well-organized.
A few comments, if I may.
- Although it is possible to assert that home schooling is damaging to children, it is VERY difficult to make a substantial, sustained argument based on hard data. Until home schoolers begin to lag behind their peers in conventional schools (public or private) in measurable areas such as test scores, literacy levels, and post-graduation employment, we're not likely to see anti-home-schooling issues gain much political traction.
- Compulsory schooling ages are currently established by states, not the federal government. Federal regulation of home schooling would almost necessarily entail a federal takeover of fifty state departments of education. While the health insurance mandate demonstrated that the federal government could, indeed intervene in matters that have normally been left to the states, it is still a difficult thing to accomplish politically.
- It's good for home educators to be subject to mild political attacks now and then. The only reason that home schooling is now legal across the country is that organizations like HSLDA and a host of similar groups from state to state have kept close watch on legislation and court cases that could affect them. They don't hesitate to make a lot of noise when some hapless senator suggests clamping down. There's nothing like the occasional political threat to keep a cause well-funded and well-organized.
8.17.2012 | 12:45pm
Matt says:
This article brings up some good and valid points. Indeed, it is quite plausible that the Leviathan that is the government may increase its influence and usurp the parents' right to select the means of the children's education.
Although homeschooling is primarily a reaction to a failed system of education, it is important that parents at least have the right to homeschool if they deem that home education will benefit their child(ren).
At the same time, though, homeschooling does have its own problems. For instance, homeschooled families tend to be matriarchies where the father's role is significantly diminished. On the Catholic side, many families chose to homeschool even though it is not part of the Church's educational tradition, nor has the magisterially explicitly given homeschooling a seal of approval. "Catholic homeschooling," then, is an oxymoron of sorts.
At the end of the day, the well-being of the child is most important and not parents' whims.
Although homeschooling is primarily a reaction to a failed system of education, it is important that parents at least have the right to homeschool if they deem that home education will benefit their child(ren).
At the same time, though, homeschooling does have its own problems. For instance, homeschooled families tend to be matriarchies where the father's role is significantly diminished. On the Catholic side, many families chose to homeschool even though it is not part of the Church's educational tradition, nor has the magisterially explicitly given homeschooling a seal of approval. "Catholic homeschooling," then, is an oxymoron of sorts.
At the end of the day, the well-being of the child is most important and not parents' whims.
8.17.2012 | 12:48pm
Ian says:
The government doesn't have to ban homeschooling. The just have to regulate it "for the good of the children."
For instance:
- You can only homeschool if you have a teaching certificate because if you don't, how can you possibly teach "properly"?
- You can only homeschool if your children attend mandatory diversity awareness classes at the local public school to make sure they are properly indoctrinated.
- You can only homeschool if you properly fill out an avalanche of paperwork to make sure that your curriculum is "well-rounded."
- You can only homeschool if you keep track of every assignment that your child does and turn them in for review at the end of each semester to make sure that your child is staying "on track."
- You can only homeschool if your curriculum matches the education outline and goals published by the NEA - just to make sure that you aren't missing any essential subjects.
See, they don't need to ban it, they can regulate it out of existence.
For instance:
- You can only homeschool if you have a teaching certificate because if you don't, how can you possibly teach "properly"?
- You can only homeschool if your children attend mandatory diversity awareness classes at the local public school to make sure they are properly indoctrinated.
- You can only homeschool if you properly fill out an avalanche of paperwork to make sure that your curriculum is "well-rounded."
- You can only homeschool if you keep track of every assignment that your child does and turn them in for review at the end of each semester to make sure that your child is staying "on track."
- You can only homeschool if your curriculum matches the education outline and goals published by the NEA - just to make sure that you aren't missing any essential subjects.
See, they don't need to ban it, they can regulate it out of existence.
8.17.2012 | 1:02pm
Cecilia says:
Diane, happy public citizen that you are,
Mr. Hennessey clearly states they are an American family who homeschools their one daughter. The point is that if the US Govt. can mandate as they have in "heathcare", they might also next mandate inescapable public schooling.
Just because you are satisfied with the results of your private and public schools, many are not. Individual parents have the right to determine what is a good education for their kids, even if it doesn't look like a good education or result to another individual.
The point is the Government does NOT have the right to determine what constitutes a "good education". "Citizenship" is NOT the highest purpose of an individual.
I would not at all be happy with a pro-Government (pro-tyranny), pro-leftist, anti-Christian, anti-family "education" that is taught in public schools, and sadly, many Christian schools.
It is exactly the "job" of parents to shield their children from that which they believe to be harmful, sinful, or just plain wrong.
And, lest we forget, our founding fathers, the majority of our classical musicians, greatest theologians and philosophers were "homeschooled".
Mr. Hennessey clearly states they are an American family who homeschools their one daughter. The point is that if the US Govt. can mandate as they have in "heathcare", they might also next mandate inescapable public schooling.
Just because you are satisfied with the results of your private and public schools, many are not. Individual parents have the right to determine what is a good education for their kids, even if it doesn't look like a good education or result to another individual.
The point is the Government does NOT have the right to determine what constitutes a "good education". "Citizenship" is NOT the highest purpose of an individual.
I would not at all be happy with a pro-Government (pro-tyranny), pro-leftist, anti-Christian, anti-family "education" that is taught in public schools, and sadly, many Christian schools.
It is exactly the "job" of parents to shield their children from that which they believe to be harmful, sinful, or just plain wrong.
And, lest we forget, our founding fathers, the majority of our classical musicians, greatest theologians and philosophers were "homeschooled".
8.17.2012 | 1:28pm
Steve says:
As recently as the 1980s, homeschooling and even Christian schools -were- illegal in a number of States. I remember vividly the images of police in Nebraska padlocking a church because it had a school that wasn't State controlled.
In my class on the history of American education, the teacher's union stated specifically that their goal is that the school become the center of society, and that children who's religious parents taught them different values and beliefs from that of the school were to be taken away from those parents.
In my class on the history of American education, the teacher's union stated specifically that their goal is that the school become the center of society, and that children who's religious parents taught them different values and beliefs from that of the school were to be taken away from those parents.
8.17.2012 | 1:32pm
Rebecca Taylor says:
I applaud Mr. Hennessey for his insight. I homeschool 3 of my 4 children and I live in a state where recently the legislature made it more difficult for us to do so. With budget shortfalls and other major issues looming, state representatives thought it worth their time to interfere with alternative learning. I can totally see them saying that someday I have to enroll the kids in a program that meets some criteria that they have.
In addition, I am really tired of people questioning my ability to homeschool my children. All of my homeschool friends agree. We are college-educated, smart, women and men who do an excellent job educating and socializing our children. We just want to be left alone to do what we do best: prepare our children to be intelligent, well-spoken, and caring adults.
In addition, I am really tired of people questioning my ability to homeschool my children. All of my homeschool friends agree. We are college-educated, smart, women and men who do an excellent job educating and socializing our children. We just want to be left alone to do what we do best: prepare our children to be intelligent, well-spoken, and caring adults.
8.17.2012 | 2:08pm
Rick says:
"Technically, all Catholics are now charged with homeschooling their children..."
Do I understand from this comment, that things have reached such a pass that Catholics who distrust/dislike the public school system should not have the option of putting their children into Catholic schools? They MUST homeschool them? I'm sorry...this is beginning to sound a bit deranged to me.
I ran into a fellow who was homeschooling his kids a couple of years ago. He seemed quite reasonable (unlike the previous poster), but he explained that he simply couldn't in good conscience put his kids into a public school system that would indoctrinate them into acceptance of homosexuality. I patiently explained to him that my kids had been in the local public school system for years, and they had never even broached the topic of homosexuality in any class. They didn't promote hatred of homosexuals (thank God), but they certainly weren't indoctrinating them into acceptance of it. They avoided the topic entirely because that isn't their business. His concern was a non-issue.
Do I understand from this comment, that things have reached such a pass that Catholics who distrust/dislike the public school system should not have the option of putting their children into Catholic schools? They MUST homeschool them? I'm sorry...this is beginning to sound a bit deranged to me.
I ran into a fellow who was homeschooling his kids a couple of years ago. He seemed quite reasonable (unlike the previous poster), but he explained that he simply couldn't in good conscience put his kids into a public school system that would indoctrinate them into acceptance of homosexuality. I patiently explained to him that my kids had been in the local public school system for years, and they had never even broached the topic of homosexuality in any class. They didn't promote hatred of homosexuals (thank God), but they certainly weren't indoctrinating them into acceptance of it. They avoided the topic entirely because that isn't their business. His concern was a non-issue.
8.17.2012 | 2:15pm
Rose says:
In rely to the above comment, the author's family doesn't live in Spain -- he was just bringing the country up as an example. Also, as someone who went to Catholic school for 5 years, I know that not all of them are adhering to Church teaching on a lot of important points. Yes, there are some very good ones. There are some that might as well be public schools. I feel I have the responsibility to make sure my future children are brought up being exposed to authentic, Catholic teachings, and I don't see a better alternative than homeschooling. A lot of Catholic and public schools are also very expensive. Add to that an already stay-at-home parent and homeschooling may also be a better option financially.
On the comment on Minnesota public schools: yes, they don't get funding after students who *don't go to the public school* Should a restaurant be paid for meals it didn't serve, just because some people chose to go to the more expensive restaurant up the street, or make dinner at home? Of course not. Yes, public education is more efficient with more students -- the cost per student goes down. But American public education is so deficient, not just compared to homeschooling but also compared to public education elsewhere, that I would lose a lot less sleep over making its operation less cost-effective than over sending my children there.
On the comment on Minnesota public schools: yes, they don't get funding after students who *don't go to the public school* Should a restaurant be paid for meals it didn't serve, just because some people chose to go to the more expensive restaurant up the street, or make dinner at home? Of course not. Yes, public education is more efficient with more students -- the cost per student goes down. But American public education is so deficient, not just compared to homeschooling but also compared to public education elsewhere, that I would lose a lot less sleep over making its operation less cost-effective than over sending my children there.
8.17.2012 | 2:28pm
Karin says:
Diane, I don't get it. Why do you assume that homeschoolers want to shield children and not help them grow? I am sure you made decisions about what was appropriate for your children at various stages of development - and that you had friends or family who made different decisions. Sometimes you and they would agree to disagree, and sometimes you and they would privately consider the other mistaken. This is the breathing space for healthy disagreement, the room for parental judgment, that Mr. Hennessey addresses in this article. It applies to the decision parents make about where to send their children to school, or whether to homeschool. It applies to simple decisions, like whether a particular child is old enough to go to school in the first place, or ready to learn about various touchy topics, or... you get the idea. The decision to homeschool can arise in a crisis situation (mine did), where the school and the parents lost confidence in each other's judgment. Or it can arise from a positive conviction that a more individualized (even idiosyncratic) approach to education will benefit a particular child. As we have continued homeschooling, my family has realized many benefits to staying out of school, ranging from improved sibling relationships; to improved social skills (my shy kids have been able to self-pace social development); to higher quality reading (particularly in middle school); to more flexible schedules, which lend themselves to the development of individual skills and abilities. I could give particular examples, but I will use only one: according to a friend whose children attended a high quality Catholic school in an economically advantaged community, parents complained when "Treasure Island" was assigned to eighth graders because it was "too hard." My sixth graders have worked through a Shakespeare play without fear - and not only my own children, but other homeschooled children I have taught in seminar-style classes. These kids are not geniuses - but they have no fear of "hard" books, and they have the time to put into reading with their parents. Why would these homeschooled children - or their parents - want a "comparable" curriculum to the local Catholic or public school?
8.17.2012 | 2:30pm
Rick says:
@Kari S:
"Rick, you're hilarious."
I've always had a talent for making people laugh, and I'm happy I was able to entertain you.
"The point is that it should NOT be up to the government to decide how parents raise their children."
Within reasonable limits. If I wanted to keep my kids home from school and pretend to educate them while I just let them watch t-v, I would support some interference from the government. I believe both the public schools and the homeschooling movement need to be reasonably regulated to ensure a quality, well-rounded education, as well as a chance at normal socialization. You, and the author, seem to be rejecting that oversight in the case of homeschooling, but not in the case of the public schools.
In fact, my wife and I have experience with several local homeschooled children that makes us question their socialization skills, as well as the motives of the parents. The parents of one child we know pulled him out of the public school because the school psychologist tried to persuade them that he had a learning disability and needed special therapy. They could not accept that. Now that their son is a teenager, we can easily see that he is grossly unsocialized and has an obvious speech disability. The public schools were eager to help him with the problem, free of charge, but no, he had to be homeschooled to protect him from the taint of being considered impaired in any way.
Our general impression is that homeschooling parents tend to fall into the "overprotective" category.
"Rick, you're hilarious."
I've always had a talent for making people laugh, and I'm happy I was able to entertain you.
"The point is that it should NOT be up to the government to decide how parents raise their children."
Within reasonable limits. If I wanted to keep my kids home from school and pretend to educate them while I just let them watch t-v, I would support some interference from the government. I believe both the public schools and the homeschooling movement need to be reasonably regulated to ensure a quality, well-rounded education, as well as a chance at normal socialization. You, and the author, seem to be rejecting that oversight in the case of homeschooling, but not in the case of the public schools.
In fact, my wife and I have experience with several local homeschooled children that makes us question their socialization skills, as well as the motives of the parents. The parents of one child we know pulled him out of the public school because the school psychologist tried to persuade them that he had a learning disability and needed special therapy. They could not accept that. Now that their son is a teenager, we can easily see that he is grossly unsocialized and has an obvious speech disability. The public schools were eager to help him with the problem, free of charge, but no, he had to be homeschooled to protect him from the taint of being considered impaired in any way.
Our general impression is that homeschooling parents tend to fall into the "overprotective" category.
8.17.2012 | 3:03pm
Diane says:
First of all, the author states his family(brother in law) lives in Spain. I did not say the author lived in Spain.
Secondly, I never said that parents should not home school their children. It was not the right choice for me and my family.
Most people who home school are not teachers or educators, some are.
What I was trying to say is that parents have the responsibility to raise and educate their children either in a school setting or to home school. I think the school district/state also has the responsibility to ensure every child receives an appropriate education in terms of content, making sure that a child has skill sets appropriate for their age. And that the parents have the ability to educate the child.
I still find no reason to link this to the health care reform bill.
Secondly, I never said that parents should not home school their children. It was not the right choice for me and my family.
Most people who home school are not teachers or educators, some are.
What I was trying to say is that parents have the responsibility to raise and educate their children either in a school setting or to home school. I think the school district/state also has the responsibility to ensure every child receives an appropriate education in terms of content, making sure that a child has skill sets appropriate for their age. And that the parents have the ability to educate the child.
I still find no reason to link this to the health care reform bill.
8.17.2012 | 3:09pm
Cecilia says:
Rick,
As a radical libertarian I reject the idea that the Government has ANY rights to protect children from their parents. However, I believe it is the right and duty of the extended family to do so. The family which our ever-increasing dependence on Government has almost completely destroyed. The more the Government via its tools, the public education system and the mass-media, depict families as BAD and Government as GOOD, the savior of all, the more the God-given system of government, the family, is broken down. God help us.
As a radical libertarian I reject the idea that the Government has ANY rights to protect children from their parents. However, I believe it is the right and duty of the extended family to do so. The family which our ever-increasing dependence on Government has almost completely destroyed. The more the Government via its tools, the public education system and the mass-media, depict families as BAD and Government as GOOD, the savior of all, the more the God-given system of government, the family, is broken down. God help us.
8.17.2012 | 3:24pm
maineman says:
Rick, you are right in that my comment was somewhat hyperbolic. I meant to be referring to the public school system. I assume it is possible for private Christian schools to pass muster as a reliable assistant in the proper education of Catholic children.
As for the public schools, I'm afraid that you are sounding a bit naive. First of all, it is clearly part and parcel of current educational sex education to normalize premature sexual behavior and to equate sex in the sacramental context of marriage with all manner of sexual depravity, thereby devaluing it. My guess is that your children may have been (appropriately) too embarrassed to tell you about the class where they practiced putting a condom on a cucumber. I remember that it was a bit of an eye-opener when my 8 year-old, in 1990, mentioned that "the AIDS lady" was coming the next day.
But it's not just the sexual perversion of public schooling, there is also the fundamentalist acceptance of neo-Darwinist notions of how reality came to be. This is a materialist theology, and it pervades the academic curriculum of all public and higher education, an arrow aimed straight at the heart of Christianity.
And as Catholics, we are supposed to practice the faith completely by opposing such demonic trends. No matter what the consequences. That may sound "deranged" to a non-Catholic or to a Catholic that hasn't gone deep into the faith and what it means to practice it wholeheartedly.
But pretty much anyone should be able to see that the history of the church has been made, more or less, by those who witnessed the faith to the point of the ultimate self-sacrifice.
And we call such people saints, rather than deranged, for having refused to knuckle under when laws of man violate those of God.
As for the public schools, I'm afraid that you are sounding a bit naive. First of all, it is clearly part and parcel of current educational sex education to normalize premature sexual behavior and to equate sex in the sacramental context of marriage with all manner of sexual depravity, thereby devaluing it. My guess is that your children may have been (appropriately) too embarrassed to tell you about the class where they practiced putting a condom on a cucumber. I remember that it was a bit of an eye-opener when my 8 year-old, in 1990, mentioned that "the AIDS lady" was coming the next day.
But it's not just the sexual perversion of public schooling, there is also the fundamentalist acceptance of neo-Darwinist notions of how reality came to be. This is a materialist theology, and it pervades the academic curriculum of all public and higher education, an arrow aimed straight at the heart of Christianity.
And as Catholics, we are supposed to practice the faith completely by opposing such demonic trends. No matter what the consequences. That may sound "deranged" to a non-Catholic or to a Catholic that hasn't gone deep into the faith and what it means to practice it wholeheartedly.
But pretty much anyone should be able to see that the history of the church has been made, more or less, by those who witnessed the faith to the point of the ultimate self-sacrifice.
And we call such people saints, rather than deranged, for having refused to knuckle under when laws of man violate those of God.
8.17.2012 | 3:49pm
Don ROberto says:
My kids (11 and 14), educated by their mother, just got their STAR tests back yesterday: both 99th percentile—again. My 14-yr-old got a perfect 600 in science. They have many friends, of varying ages (none of whom smoke, drink, or fornicate). They have a more varied life than kids in school. They once spent six weeks in Mexico during the school year. They'll be camping at Lake Tahoe with a friend of theirs and her family (also homeschooled) in a couple weeks when others are sitting in classrooms. The 14-yr-old has sung solo important roles in plays in front of hundreds of people. She plays Chopin, Mozart, etc. on the piano. They've both marched in pro-life rallies along the streets of Sodom—er, I mean San Francisco. They are not learning how to protect themselves when engaging in various degenerate acts. They are not learning that "alternative lifestyles" are A-okay, and that one person's version of truth is as good as another's. And they do not listen to (much) pop music, watch (much) TV or engage in the kind of social competition that their (unfortunate) peers do, educated as they are by 25 savages—er, kids their age—and one or two adults.
When I was their age I wasted untold hours, becoming an expert in spitball shooting, booby-trapping other kids' desks and reading comic books in class. (I would have commited sepuku before going on stage to singing solo in front of a crowd. )
Thank God for home schooling. †
When I was their age I wasted untold hours, becoming an expert in spitball shooting, booby-trapping other kids' desks and reading comic books in class. (I would have commited sepuku before going on stage to singing solo in front of a crowd. )
Thank God for home schooling. †
8.17.2012 | 4:12pm
Martha says:
As a gal who was homeschooled myself and plans to homeschool my own children, I have to say that homeschooling is indeed a precarious right as it is. Homeschoolers often face nosy neighbors that call DCF because they notice the children aren't attending public school; they are the subject of suspicion by many in government authority. Many are threatened with the loss of their children for perceived "negligence" that really functions as mere pretext for government punishment of their education choices. We certainly experienced this.
And my parents weren't religious. They were atheist hippies, one with a degree in education, who wanted their children to develop their imaginations - not exactly the incompetent zealots of leftist nightmares.
But all these anecdotes concerning homeschooled children are besides the point. At issue is not whether you think homeschooled children are weird or "poorly socialized"; I am sure we can all agree that there are odd ducks in every educational institution. The question is, do parents have the right to educate their children and if so, how much that right is subject to regulation by the state.
In theory, I agree with state regulation of home education. In practice, I see many potential problems. The government has it's own interests; I am not entirely sure we can trust it to be looking out for the best interests of children. The federal government through its overbearing and unnecessary Dept. of Education frequently coerces state action and standards. Furthermore, the state is slow moving and its regulations are overly-broad; by it's very nature, it is not an entity given to narrowly tailor regulations with appropriate exceptions and expediency of process. When a violation of a regulation is charged, getting it resolved often costs the parents great time and money, even if they found to be in the right in the end. Government workers are famously devoid of compassion, common sense, and any level of efficiency.
State regulation is a tool we must be very careful in using in matters that require delicacy and discretion, such as this; it is a that is tool is blunt and inexact, and once invited in, is most assuredly there to stay, long after it has outlived its usefulness.
And my parents weren't religious. They were atheist hippies, one with a degree in education, who wanted their children to develop their imaginations - not exactly the incompetent zealots of leftist nightmares.
But all these anecdotes concerning homeschooled children are besides the point. At issue is not whether you think homeschooled children are weird or "poorly socialized"; I am sure we can all agree that there are odd ducks in every educational institution. The question is, do parents have the right to educate their children and if so, how much that right is subject to regulation by the state.
In theory, I agree with state regulation of home education. In practice, I see many potential problems. The government has it's own interests; I am not entirely sure we can trust it to be looking out for the best interests of children. The federal government through its overbearing and unnecessary Dept. of Education frequently coerces state action and standards. Furthermore, the state is slow moving and its regulations are overly-broad; by it's very nature, it is not an entity given to narrowly tailor regulations with appropriate exceptions and expediency of process. When a violation of a regulation is charged, getting it resolved often costs the parents great time and money, even if they found to be in the right in the end. Government workers are famously devoid of compassion, common sense, and any level of efficiency.
State regulation is a tool we must be very careful in using in matters that require delicacy and discretion, such as this; it is a that is tool is blunt and inexact, and once invited in, is most assuredly there to stay, long after it has outlived its usefulness.
8.17.2012 | 5:56pm
James Kabala says:
"A government that can force you to buy health insurance can surely force children into the public school system. When that happens, will we still be a free country?"
Probably some mention should be made of Pierce v. Society of Sisters, which no one has yet done. Of course, it could (in theory) be overturned.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierce_v._Society_of_Sisters
Probably some mention should be made of Pierce v. Society of Sisters, which no one has yet done. Of course, it could (in theory) be overturned.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierce_v._Society_of_Sisters
8.17.2012 | 6:17pm
Thomas Murray says:
"While we do it for mostly personal reasons, we are keenly aware that the practice is viewed by many (if not most) as a political act."
For many (or most) on the left, almost everything is a political act, particularly if it threatens their control. Public schools spend much time indoctrinating children, rather than educating them. This is particularly true in California, where the state government thought it necessary to pass a law requiring schools to teach the historical contributions of gays, lesbians, transgender, etc. people to the state of California. (Interestingly, when an active supporter legislator was asked to provide an example of the kind of person who would be highlighted by this new instructional requirement, he could not.)
For every one of these pet programs, time in the school day is taken away from teaching students how to read, write, and master mathematics. California rates near the bottom of the states (and DC) in survey after survey. My honor student children have been taught almost nothing about the Civil War, but have been exposed to much politically-driven instruction concerning man-caused global warming (being made to watch Al Gore's "documentary"), diversity and tolerance (the promotion of the activist gay agenda - students being encouraged to protest Proposition 8 defending marriage), and the like. Many studies and tests of high school and college students show an amazing lack on knowledge about our country's history, how our government works, and what it means to be a good citizen, so the notion that public education is preparing future citizens is patently false.
In terms of the quality of education, home-schoolers are frequently being featured on local newscasts concerning their higher test scores and acceptance into elite universities. and socialization, is it really that important to expose your child to the bullying that seems rampant in many, if not most schools?
Aside from any religious considerations, amply covered by the author and other commentators above, the public school system as a whole is broken, and the success of home-schoolers, Catholic and other private schools, and many charter schools only shines a light on the failure of public schools, which makes them dangerous to the entrenched education establishment.
For many (or most) on the left, almost everything is a political act, particularly if it threatens their control. Public schools spend much time indoctrinating children, rather than educating them. This is particularly true in California, where the state government thought it necessary to pass a law requiring schools to teach the historical contributions of gays, lesbians, transgender, etc. people to the state of California. (Interestingly, when an active supporter legislator was asked to provide an example of the kind of person who would be highlighted by this new instructional requirement, he could not.)
For every one of these pet programs, time in the school day is taken away from teaching students how to read, write, and master mathematics. California rates near the bottom of the states (and DC) in survey after survey. My honor student children have been taught almost nothing about the Civil War, but have been exposed to much politically-driven instruction concerning man-caused global warming (being made to watch Al Gore's "documentary"), diversity and tolerance (the promotion of the activist gay agenda - students being encouraged to protest Proposition 8 defending marriage), and the like. Many studies and tests of high school and college students show an amazing lack on knowledge about our country's history, how our government works, and what it means to be a good citizen, so the notion that public education is preparing future citizens is patently false.
In terms of the quality of education, home-schoolers are frequently being featured on local newscasts concerning their higher test scores and acceptance into elite universities. and socialization, is it really that important to expose your child to the bullying that seems rampant in many, if not most schools?
Aside from any religious considerations, amply covered by the author and other commentators above, the public school system as a whole is broken, and the success of home-schoolers, Catholic and other private schools, and many charter schools only shines a light on the failure of public schools, which makes them dangerous to the entrenched education establishment.
8.17.2012 | 8:07pm
Paul says:
William L Harnist, 9:00 a.m.:
"And how about the financial cost to the "government schools" imposed by homeschoolers. Here in Minnesota, the school district loses out on state aid for every child that is not enrolled in the the local school. That entails thousands of dollars per student per year(both homeschoolers and private school students)."
It would help school districts then if we ban contraception, too.
"And how about the financial cost to the "government schools" imposed by homeschoolers. Here in Minnesota, the school district loses out on state aid for every child that is not enrolled in the the local school. That entails thousands of dollars per student per year(both homeschoolers and private school students)."
It would help school districts then if we ban contraception, too.
8.18.2012 | 12:21am
Joe DeVet says:
Catholic teaching says that the parents are the primary educators of their children. This common-sense insight certainly does not mean they have to home-school them or send them to Catholic schools. However, it does mean that they have the duty and the right to call the shots on their kids' education, seeing to their kids' moral, social and intellectual development.
For some, it may come to a point that they believe, in conscience, that they must homeschool. I can certainly sympathize with this belief, when the broken public school system attacks moral and religious values, while at the same time failing utterly to give their students even a minmimally decent education in history, math, science, social studies and language skills.
The education and government "experts" quoted in this article make the case nicely in favor of the homeschooling movement. For example, the sinister Robert Reich, cited as a political scientist here, was the labor secretary under Clinton, I believe. He showed himself then, and confirms now, that he is more a leftist political apparatchik than political "scientist."
For some, it may come to a point that they believe, in conscience, that they must homeschool. I can certainly sympathize with this belief, when the broken public school system attacks moral and religious values, while at the same time failing utterly to give their students even a minmimally decent education in history, math, science, social studies and language skills.
The education and government "experts" quoted in this article make the case nicely in favor of the homeschooling movement. For example, the sinister Robert Reich, cited as a political scientist here, was the labor secretary under Clinton, I believe. He showed himself then, and confirms now, that he is more a leftist political apparatchik than political "scientist."
8.18.2012 | 1:40am
James Kabala says:
For what it's worth (not necessarily much, since both are leftists), it is a different Robert Reich:
http://www.stanford.edu/group/reichresearch/cgi-bin/site/cv/
http://www.stanford.edu/group/reichresearch/cgi-bin/site/cv/
8.18.2012 | 3:25am
Rick says:
@Cecilia: "As a radical libertarian I reject the idea that the Government has ANY rights to protect children from their parents."
Tiens! A radical Libertarian! Actually, it's refreshing to run into such an outlier in a forum like this. (I think you may have some philosophical differences with the orthodox Catholics who would never dare question one jot or tittle of the teachings of the Magesterium.) May I assume that you are a devotee of Ayn Rand, just as Paul Ryan is?
However, I still have to disagree that no level of abusive treatment by parents should warrent government interference. If I beat my children with a rubber hose every night, I would expect some appropriate interference from the police.
Tiens! A radical Libertarian! Actually, it's refreshing to run into such an outlier in a forum like this. (I think you may have some philosophical differences with the orthodox Catholics who would never dare question one jot or tittle of the teachings of the Magesterium.) May I assume that you are a devotee of Ayn Rand, just as Paul Ryan is?
However, I still have to disagree that no level of abusive treatment by parents should warrent government interference. If I beat my children with a rubber hose every night, I would expect some appropriate interference from the police.
8.18.2012 | 3:54am
Rick says:
@maineman: "My guess is that your children may have been (appropriately) too embarrassed to tell you about the class where they practiced putting a condom on a cucumber."
First, let me say that I sincerely appreciate your committment to promoting and protecting Christian civilization. However, if I am naive concerning the public schools, you sound like you may have been a bit brainwashed concerning their profligate evils. Once something is demonized in a certain community, then distorted information gets passed around and is often indiscriminately accepted because it reinforces the existing stereotype. You honestly think that in this tight-knit community, our children are being trained in putting condoms on cucumbers, and NONE of the kids have breathed a word of it to their parents. So, NO parent has been able to spread the word? It's simply laughable.
I heard something very similar years ago while I was driving in town and listening to a Chuck Colson radio broadcast. Let me first say that I greatly admired his prison ministry. But in this program, he sounded the alarm about the corruption of the Girl Scouts. He related how young Girl Scouts today are routinely trained in the art of installing a condom on an erect male dummy. I almost drove into a tree. The next day I ran into Susan, who was a senior Girl Scout leader and the curator of the National Scouting Museum at that time. I related Colson's story to her. She stared at me, open-mouthed, for several seconds and then doubled over laughing. When she got control of herself, she explained that the only thing touching on sexuality that the Girl Scouts deals with is a class on basic feminine hygiene, and that is only for the older girls and only with parental permission.
Of course, there are public schools and there are public schools, but we are blessed with quite a good system in our town. Just as a random example of its excellence, the high school band is so musically accomplished that it was invited to play in Carnegie Hall. We all flew to New York for the performance.
First, let me say that I sincerely appreciate your committment to promoting and protecting Christian civilization. However, if I am naive concerning the public schools, you sound like you may have been a bit brainwashed concerning their profligate evils. Once something is demonized in a certain community, then distorted information gets passed around and is often indiscriminately accepted because it reinforces the existing stereotype. You honestly think that in this tight-knit community, our children are being trained in putting condoms on cucumbers, and NONE of the kids have breathed a word of it to their parents. So, NO parent has been able to spread the word? It's simply laughable.
I heard something very similar years ago while I was driving in town and listening to a Chuck Colson radio broadcast. Let me first say that I greatly admired his prison ministry. But in this program, he sounded the alarm about the corruption of the Girl Scouts. He related how young Girl Scouts today are routinely trained in the art of installing a condom on an erect male dummy. I almost drove into a tree. The next day I ran into Susan, who was a senior Girl Scout leader and the curator of the National Scouting Museum at that time. I related Colson's story to her. She stared at me, open-mouthed, for several seconds and then doubled over laughing. When she got control of herself, she explained that the only thing touching on sexuality that the Girl Scouts deals with is a class on basic feminine hygiene, and that is only for the older girls and only with parental permission.
Of course, there are public schools and there are public schools, but we are blessed with quite a good system in our town. Just as a random example of its excellence, the high school band is so musically accomplished that it was invited to play in Carnegie Hall. We all flew to New York for the performance.
8.18.2012 | 10:38am
Richard M says:
"[A]lso sacrificed is their exposure to diverse ideas, cultures, and ways of being."
This is shorthand for: "indoctrination into contemporary American liberalism." It's not the indoctrination that they object to. It's what's being indoctrinated, and who's doing the indoctrinated.
I plan to send my own children to quality Catholic schools. But I think the policies advocated by West West must be resisted to our last breaths, with every means at our disposal.
This is shorthand for: "indoctrination into contemporary American liberalism." It's not the indoctrination that they object to. It's what's being indoctrinated, and who's doing the indoctrinated.
I plan to send my own children to quality Catholic schools. But I think the policies advocated by West West must be resisted to our last breaths, with every means at our disposal.
8.18.2012 | 12:27pm
Ann says:
I believe that it is the parents right to decide how to educate their children. Homeschooling sounds like a great alternative or solution to the problems of traditional school whether it be public or private. However, my observation is that it is often not much of an alternative academically. Sleeping late, no schedules, haphazard completion of curriculum, etc. I know many homeschoolers and read much of these anecdotes on blogs and 1 in 10 seems to follow a solid routine. And most young kids spend the majority of their school time on worksheets. I do not see the field trips, accelerated reading and math and all that good stuff. I would support any program that would help parents do their job of educating their children. I would be hesitant to let the state in any more than it is already. I don't see homeschoolers making the most of it but it is their choice to mess it up if they so choose. Just as it is my choice to not homeschool. We have had good experiences in public and private school. Honor roll, advanced math and reading skills for all my kids (and yes it does mean something. They are far more advanced academically than any homeschool child we know) but those are my children and our experience. Homeschoolers are in many ways their own worst enemy. I read a blog this week in which the homeschooling Mom bragged about staying in pjs few days each week watching cartoons.
http://www.catholicsistas.com/2012/08/16/the-case-against-teenage-dating-2/
The article was not about homeschooling but whatever her point was lost on me as I couldn't get past the pajamas and SpongeBob all day. This the kind of ammunition that is just handed to the anti homeschooling crowd.
I hope that homeschooling is far more effective than what I have seen. I really do hope that, otherwise homeschool children are being cheated out of an education. And not being taught critical life skills like how to work.
I will admit that my oldest is a senior in high school and we have seen changes in schools. We are happy that we are almost done with public school. The next two are in Catholic school. I would not send my children to public school in our district.
The decision to homeschool may not be a political act but it is a judgment of the system and as such sets up a dynamic that becomes political. It becomes a push and pull over which is best and resources to get the job done. One way to protect the right to homeschool is to not give ammunition to the enemy, to help each other be good teachers, to have higher expectations than just "at least we are not in public school. At least my kids are not exposed to those kids" or my favorite "we get to be flexible and can get more done".
http://www.catholicsistas.com/2012/08/16/the-case-against-teenage-dating-2/
The article was not about homeschooling but whatever her point was lost on me as I couldn't get past the pajamas and SpongeBob all day. This the kind of ammunition that is just handed to the anti homeschooling crowd.
I hope that homeschooling is far more effective than what I have seen. I really do hope that, otherwise homeschool children are being cheated out of an education. And not being taught critical life skills like how to work.
I will admit that my oldest is a senior in high school and we have seen changes in schools. We are happy that we are almost done with public school. The next two are in Catholic school. I would not send my children to public school in our district.
The decision to homeschool may not be a political act but it is a judgment of the system and as such sets up a dynamic that becomes political. It becomes a push and pull over which is best and resources to get the job done. One way to protect the right to homeschool is to not give ammunition to the enemy, to help each other be good teachers, to have higher expectations than just "at least we are not in public school. At least my kids are not exposed to those kids" or my favorite "we get to be flexible and can get more done".
8.18.2012 | 2:23pm
Hieronymus says:
A few warnings from abroad:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/swedish-homeschooling-leader-flees-country-following-alleged-persecution/
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2010/mar/10032601
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/sweden-tightens-legal-noose-on-homeschooling
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2008/jun/08061910
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2006/sep/06091407
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/swedish-homeschooling-leader-flees-country-following-alleged-persecution/
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2010/mar/10032601
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/sweden-tightens-legal-noose-on-homeschooling
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2008/jun/08061910
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2006/sep/06091407
8.18.2012 | 4:01pm
David Mills says:
In response to the claim that "'Catholic homeschooling' is an oxymoron of sorts," readers may want to read the Diocese of Pittsburgh's statement Faith Education in the Home, which can be found at:
http://diopitt.org/sites/default/files/FaithEducationHome.pdf
and Notre Dame law professor Gerard Bradley's chapter, "The Choice to Homeschool," in The Great Life: Essays on Doctrine and Holiness in Honor of Fr. Ronald Lawler, most of which is available through googlebooks.
http://diopitt.org/sites/default/files/FaithEducationHome.pdf
and Notre Dame law professor Gerard Bradley's chapter, "The Choice to Homeschool," in The Great Life: Essays on Doctrine and Holiness in Honor of Fr. Ronald Lawler, most of which is available through googlebooks.
8.18.2012 | 6:05pm
Sister Terese Peter says:
I remember when the clintons occupied the White House one of the public statements Hillary made was that she viewed homeschooling as the "worst form of child abuse." Why the mainstream media chose to ignore this ridiculous statement is beyond me...
8.18.2012 | 7:39pm
Joseph J. Pippet says:
JMJ Goverment schools are called public schools because it doesn't sound goog calling them Goverment Schools. Goverment (Townships, cities, etc.) schools are subsidized through Taxes. Controled by Goverment personal, School Boards, etc. School attendance is Mandatory. You have no control (you can disagree, complain, Elect new members to the school board, etc. But, they are still Goverment Controlled) The People literally threw God out of the schools (Goverment wants to be in control of schools, God in , goverment has no control "It" (the People)gets rid of God (by it I mean Goverment, We the People= People who make up the goverment.) they are in control of the future Our Children. A Great Evil has been Placed in Goverment (Public) Schools! That Evil has enterd the Catholic Schools through the years. Respectfuly with love, Joseph J. Pippet
8.18.2012 | 8:29pm
theBuckWheat says:
In our area, if all the homeschooling children were required to enroll in public schools, the system would have to build at least one new school building. Our daughter is now 30 and was homeschooled for all but 2 of her primary and secondary school years. She graduated from a top ranked University with a Masters and two under-grad degrees with honors.
We make a grave mistake by allowing government to run schools. At most, government's interest is only to see that each child gets a proper education. But when government runs the schools and 30% of students drop out or graduate without sufficient competency, government gets to make excuses and give itself a pass.
When our daughter was being evaluated for enrollment in a local high school program, the school officials suggested that she be placed two grades later than her age would otherwise indicate. While we are proud of our daughter, we take this differential to indicate how poor a job public schools do simply because of their structure and they way they educate children. This implies a massive social cost in what academic performance we never see because of how government schools are run. The cost in terms of GDP is staggering (in the Trillions of Dollars) in lower overall lifetime performance and employment consequences!
In some urban public school districts, when the drop out rate and rate of subject competency is taken into account along with the capital costs of the school system, it costs in excess of ONE MILLION DOLLARS to graduate a single student who is competent at their grade level in math and science.
We must move to a system where parents are free to send their children to the school of their choice. We cannot do this fast enough. And any parent who can should homeschool their child. It is a wonderful bonding experience, you get to revisit long-forgotten topics and you will help your child be the best adult they can be.
We make a grave mistake by allowing government to run schools. At most, government's interest is only to see that each child gets a proper education. But when government runs the schools and 30% of students drop out or graduate without sufficient competency, government gets to make excuses and give itself a pass.
When our daughter was being evaluated for enrollment in a local high school program, the school officials suggested that she be placed two grades later than her age would otherwise indicate. While we are proud of our daughter, we take this differential to indicate how poor a job public schools do simply because of their structure and they way they educate children. This implies a massive social cost in what academic performance we never see because of how government schools are run. The cost in terms of GDP is staggering (in the Trillions of Dollars) in lower overall lifetime performance and employment consequences!
In some urban public school districts, when the drop out rate and rate of subject competency is taken into account along with the capital costs of the school system, it costs in excess of ONE MILLION DOLLARS to graduate a single student who is competent at their grade level in math and science.
We must move to a system where parents are free to send their children to the school of their choice. We cannot do this fast enough. And any parent who can should homeschool their child. It is a wonderful bonding experience, you get to revisit long-forgotten topics and you will help your child be the best adult they can be.
8.18.2012 | 10:39pm
Doctor K says:
I am a pediatrician of 20 years and parent to 3 school age daughters who has spent time over the past few years studying the increasing assault on Parental Rights that is occurring. This will ultimately lead to the end of home schooling, that is a fact.
Please take some time to educate yourself on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UN CRC). The U.S. and Somalia are the only 2 UN members whom have not ratified it yet. It was signed by Madeline Albright during the Clinton administration and is still to be ratified. Obama stated that it was an embarrassment that it had not been ratified shortly after entering office. Time Magazine set a target date for ratification of 11/20/20012 in their January issue.
While clothed in the goodness of stopping Child Labor and Sex Trafficking (who doesn't want to end those?), the heart of the UN CRC is all about gutting parental rights and trumping them with the rights of the child, including, the right to choose their own religion, the right to sex ed at the youngest of ages (including the gay agenda), the right to access contraception, emergency contraception and abortion at young ages without parental consent or knowledge, and the right to an education deemed "acceptable" by the state.
Visit http://www.ParentalRights.org to learn more.
Please take some time to educate yourself on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UN CRC). The U.S. and Somalia are the only 2 UN members whom have not ratified it yet. It was signed by Madeline Albright during the Clinton administration and is still to be ratified. Obama stated that it was an embarrassment that it had not been ratified shortly after entering office. Time Magazine set a target date for ratification of 11/20/20012 in their January issue.
While clothed in the goodness of stopping Child Labor and Sex Trafficking (who doesn't want to end those?), the heart of the UN CRC is all about gutting parental rights and trumping them with the rights of the child, including, the right to choose their own religion, the right to sex ed at the youngest of ages (including the gay agenda), the right to access contraception, emergency contraception and abortion at young ages without parental consent or knowledge, and the right to an education deemed "acceptable" by the state.
Visit http://www.ParentalRights.org to learn more.
8.19.2012 | 10:37am
Joe DeVet says:
Contra those comments which portray home schooling as harmful or dangerous, actual studies show that on average home schooled kids excel in all aspects of learning achievement, vs public-schooled children, and by a large margin at that.
Let's revisit the key reason for the phenomenal growth in home schooling. Government schools were a good idea when there was reasonable consensus on standards of education, morals, decency, civic virtue, and good manners. In my lifetime, ALL of these consensuses have crumbled away, and with them the efficacy of public education. The latter always reflects the culture, and cultural norms in these areas have all broken down. No wonder our government-education system has crumbled as well.
As indicated in the article, and warned of in many of the comments, those who helped break the education system are now intensifying efforts to restore its monopoly. We must resist this incursion on the right and duty of parents to be the "primary educators." While we're at it, we must also defend the integrity of the family itself, since the breakdown of the family makes it harder for many parents to do their educational duties well, thus tempting the government to greater intervention.
Let's revisit the key reason for the phenomenal growth in home schooling. Government schools were a good idea when there was reasonable consensus on standards of education, morals, decency, civic virtue, and good manners. In my lifetime, ALL of these consensuses have crumbled away, and with them the efficacy of public education. The latter always reflects the culture, and cultural norms in these areas have all broken down. No wonder our government-education system has crumbled as well.
As indicated in the article, and warned of in many of the comments, those who helped break the education system are now intensifying efforts to restore its monopoly. We must resist this incursion on the right and duty of parents to be the "primary educators." While we're at it, we must also defend the integrity of the family itself, since the breakdown of the family makes it harder for many parents to do their educational duties well, thus tempting the government to greater intervention.
8.19.2012 | 11:10am
Maudie N Mandeville says:
“The minimal standard will include academic benchmarks as well as an assurance that children are exposed to and engaged with ideas, values, and beliefs that are different from those of the parents.”
How about allowing 'ideas, values, and beliefs that are different from those of the professors'? Now that would be 'guarding against indoctrination'!
How about allowing 'ideas, values, and beliefs that are different from those of the professors'? Now that would be 'guarding against indoctrination'!
8.19.2012 | 11:51am
wildman says:
Just a little translation needed:
In a 2010 paper in the journal Philosophy and Public Policy Quarterly, Georgetown Law School professor Robin L. West characterized homeschooling families as a political “army,” "they who homeschool do not belive in Mr west's worldview" whose objective “is to undermine, limit, or destroy state functions. . ."We, the elites like mr west have an inherent right to pour whatever drivel we come up with into your childs mind" Also sacrificed is their exposure to diverse ideas "GOD is dead,The state is benevolent, The elites know whats best for you and yours" , cultures "Islamic, Gay, Lesbian,Transgendered,etc" , and ways of being "Gay, Lesbian, Athiest, Muslim, etc, so long as it does not conform to judeo-christian beliefs. .” Others see homeschooling as a potential threat to public health "Without the kids at public schools= less need to union teachers, less need for overpaid administrators, Less need for moronic school boards trying to out hip or relevance each other, Less grant money from the state or feds. The only health being threatened is the education machine which is broken but still manages to stumble on.;
In a 2010 paper in the journal Philosophy and Public Policy Quarterly, Georgetown Law School professor Robin L. West characterized homeschooling families as a political “army,” "they who homeschool do not belive in Mr west's worldview" whose objective “is to undermine, limit, or destroy state functions. . ."We, the elites like mr west have an inherent right to pour whatever drivel we come up with into your childs mind" Also sacrificed is their exposure to diverse ideas "GOD is dead,The state is benevolent, The elites know whats best for you and yours" , cultures "Islamic, Gay, Lesbian,Transgendered,etc" , and ways of being "Gay, Lesbian, Athiest, Muslim, etc, so long as it does not conform to judeo-christian beliefs. .” Others see homeschooling as a potential threat to public health "Without the kids at public schools= less need to union teachers, less need for overpaid administrators, Less need for moronic school boards trying to out hip or relevance each other, Less grant money from the state or feds. The only health being threatened is the education machine which is broken but still manages to stumble on.;
8.19.2012 | 5:17pm
Rick says:
@wildman:
If you got your writing style and understanding of English grammar and punctuation from the public school system, that alone would be an eloquent buttress to your argument.
If you got your writing style and understanding of English grammar and punctuation from the public school system, that alone would be an eloquent buttress to your argument.
8.19.2012 | 7:05pm
Suzanne Carl says:
I home school my only child and teach part time at a university. When I hear people talk about the value of socialization, I wonder if that isn't code for indoctrination by the state. I really can think of no more unnatural setting for a child than to be put in a desk in room with 20 to 30 peers who are almost exactly the same age. So yes, I make a natural law case for home schooling. For most of human existence, children lived and learned at home until they demonstrated an aptitude for something beyond the scope of the family. Unless the child was a twin or the families nearby had children at the same time, he wouldn't be spending much time socializing most of the time with peers as we understand it in out contemporary school settings. Instead this child would be a leader to some and a follower of others. And the bulk of his time would be with family. Most of his outside social contacts would be of a more formal nature than we now experience. After all, we now have work-families, school-families, even our grocery stores are trying to be our families. It is wrong to think that a child will grow up without the influence of others, but it is likewise wrong to abdicate parental responsibility to the pint that your child is away more than at home.
8.19.2012 | 10:22pm
Glenda LaGarde says:
I once was skeptical about homeschooling, but times have changed. After teaching in elementary, high-school, and college level for over 25 years, I believe suppression of parents' right and responsibility of educating their children, increased physical and moral risks in public schools (and sometimes private and parochial), and increasingly biased indoctrination in political ideology though textbooks and DHHS mandates more than justify another way.
There is no one way to educate; no perfect faculty, no super-parents, and always the human tendency to procrastinate, to self-serve, and to control. But at least if parents' right to choose what they believe best for the child is honored, chances are good that private, parochial, or public education may be good choices. It's when government overreaches, seeks to indoctrinate in specific values and beliefs, and usurps parents' authority that parents respond by turning elsewhere.
For my grandchildren, I trust my children and their spouses to choose, and will pray, work, and vote to give them that right. As a retired teacher, I've seen a dramatic, persistent decline in skills from public school educated students--in basic English ( reading and writing), basic math, history (especially of America and Europe), and in culture (art, music, literature). In beginning composition classes, few will admit to reading a newspaper (even online), a magazine (even sports or fashion), much less a novel. In-coming homeschooled students I've had were superior in these skills and read. Some homeschooled had one perspective (religious or political), but knew it. The same bias occurred in public educated. Often, the public educated students had been taught "to the test" whereas the private, parochial, or homeschooled were more used to critical thinking and independent investigation, though there were some exceptions.
In general, I'd say: if your unique situation suggests home-schooling, do it with others, research and choose a good basic system for structure, be sure you have the self-discipline, patience, and time to insure a sound academic and diverse social environment for your child. And be flexible; if your child does not benefit, do not be afraid to search out options.
There is no one way to educate; no perfect faculty, no super-parents, and always the human tendency to procrastinate, to self-serve, and to control. But at least if parents' right to choose what they believe best for the child is honored, chances are good that private, parochial, or public education may be good choices. It's when government overreaches, seeks to indoctrinate in specific values and beliefs, and usurps parents' authority that parents respond by turning elsewhere.
For my grandchildren, I trust my children and their spouses to choose, and will pray, work, and vote to give them that right. As a retired teacher, I've seen a dramatic, persistent decline in skills from public school educated students--in basic English ( reading and writing), basic math, history (especially of America and Europe), and in culture (art, music, literature). In beginning composition classes, few will admit to reading a newspaper (even online), a magazine (even sports or fashion), much less a novel. In-coming homeschooled students I've had were superior in these skills and read. Some homeschooled had one perspective (religious or political), but knew it. The same bias occurred in public educated. Often, the public educated students had been taught "to the test" whereas the private, parochial, or homeschooled were more used to critical thinking and independent investigation, though there were some exceptions.
In general, I'd say: if your unique situation suggests home-schooling, do it with others, research and choose a good basic system for structure, be sure you have the self-discipline, patience, and time to insure a sound academic and diverse social environment for your child. And be flexible; if your child does not benefit, do not be afraid to search out options.
8.19.2012 | 10:50pm
Dean from Ohio says:
They can have my right to homeschool my kids when they pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
8.20.2012 | 3:43am
Rick says:
@Glenda LaGarde:
I appreciate your great experience as a teacher, but I think the conclusion that public schooling today has deteriorated greatly since "the good old days" may be overly simplistic.
I attended a public high school in Texas in the 1950s that could only be described as pathetic. Many of the teachers were unqualified to be teaching their subjects. The biology teacher taught us that the only cells in the human body with chromosomes were the sex cells. I gave a presentation on calculus, which I had been teaching myself, in my physics class, and the teacher said that he couldn't make any comment on my presentation since he had never studied calculus. World History dealt only with Europe and America, to the exclusion of most of humanity. I don't think the students even learned that European countries and America colonized most of the world from the 16th to the 20th centuries.
There was violence in that school, to be sure, but I only recall it coming from the teachers. The principal had a big board that he used on me with extreme vigor for the most trivial infractions. Then one day, a math teacher and a history teacher got into an argument over the Civil War and decided to settle it outside with a duel. The math teacher shot and killed the history teacher.
By contrast, my two sons are in a public high school in our small Kentucky town today that is light years ahead of my Texas high school. The math is so rigorous that, even though I was the type to teach myself calculus, I have problems helping them with homework in the more advanced classes, and the AP chemistry class left me in the dust. The band is so musically advanced that they were invited to play at Carnegie Hall. Moreover, no one at this school has beaten my sons with board.
The situation is clearly more complex, although I think you have an excellent point about the overall decline in serious reading. When I was in a public community college in California in the 1960s, my professor in English 101 asked the students to tell the class what novel they had most recently read. EVERY student had a novel to offer. (Mine was "One Flew over the Cookoo's Nest.") And the professor had salient questions to ask about each novel that was mentioned. He had read all of them. Try that in a community college today, and you might get responses like, "What's a novel?"
I appreciate your great experience as a teacher, but I think the conclusion that public schooling today has deteriorated greatly since "the good old days" may be overly simplistic.
I attended a public high school in Texas in the 1950s that could only be described as pathetic. Many of the teachers were unqualified to be teaching their subjects. The biology teacher taught us that the only cells in the human body with chromosomes were the sex cells. I gave a presentation on calculus, which I had been teaching myself, in my physics class, and the teacher said that he couldn't make any comment on my presentation since he had never studied calculus. World History dealt only with Europe and America, to the exclusion of most of humanity. I don't think the students even learned that European countries and America colonized most of the world from the 16th to the 20th centuries.
There was violence in that school, to be sure, but I only recall it coming from the teachers. The principal had a big board that he used on me with extreme vigor for the most trivial infractions. Then one day, a math teacher and a history teacher got into an argument over the Civil War and decided to settle it outside with a duel. The math teacher shot and killed the history teacher.
By contrast, my two sons are in a public high school in our small Kentucky town today that is light years ahead of my Texas high school. The math is so rigorous that, even though I was the type to teach myself calculus, I have problems helping them with homework in the more advanced classes, and the AP chemistry class left me in the dust. The band is so musically advanced that they were invited to play at Carnegie Hall. Moreover, no one at this school has beaten my sons with board.
The situation is clearly more complex, although I think you have an excellent point about the overall decline in serious reading. When I was in a public community college in California in the 1960s, my professor in English 101 asked the students to tell the class what novel they had most recently read. EVERY student had a novel to offer. (Mine was "One Flew over the Cookoo's Nest.") And the professor had salient questions to ask about each novel that was mentioned. He had read all of them. Try that in a community college today, and you might get responses like, "What's a novel?"
8.20.2012 | 9:01am
margretto says:
Any child that I have ever met that has been home schooled were always polite, respectful and faithful. I see them very reverent at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass not like their counterparts. I am sick and tired of hearing how they aren't being socialized properly. The real problem is that they aren't being brainwashed by the state, that is the real fear of the governement.
For the naysayers who say the government would never end homeschooling are plainly niave, it is happening throughtout the world. The educator made the point for homeschooling when she stated that her children don't have faith dispite a Catholic school education. It isn't the school that sets the values but the parents; homeschooling allows the parents to influence their children and teach them values without the interference of others. Bravo to them!
For the naysayers who say the government would never end homeschooling are plainly niave, it is happening throughtout the world. The educator made the point for homeschooling when she stated that her children don't have faith dispite a Catholic school education. It isn't the school that sets the values but the parents; homeschooling allows the parents to influence their children and teach them values without the interference of others. Bravo to them!
8.20.2012 | 4:56pm
Rick says:
@margretto:
So, with Diane (the educator) sending her children to Catholic schools where they were rigorously catechized, and with her doing her best, as she said, to turn them into good Catholics at home, they became secular adults. But you honestly believe that if she had simply kept them at home all the time, they would now be faithful? I'm afraid that's a bit of a stretch.
So, with Diane (the educator) sending her children to Catholic schools where they were rigorously catechized, and with her doing her best, as she said, to turn them into good Catholics at home, they became secular adults. But you honestly believe that if she had simply kept them at home all the time, they would now be faithful? I'm afraid that's a bit of a stretch.
8.20.2012 | 6:00pm
Kirk says:
If one can not see the on going assault on our children to become more and more secular and that the battle ground is our public schools then they are probably blind to all of the doings of the devil in the world. I wonder if they think that abortion is a choice and contraception is good because it helps with over population. What about the lie that sex is OK out of marriage as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else and that the two "love" each other. The list could go on and on.
8.20.2012 | 9:56pm
E.L.G says:
Government schools were created to educate the poor, not to become the standard. It was a way for children that might not have the means or opportunity to learn to read, write, and do arithmetic. Other children were home schooled, privately tutored, sent abroad, or sent to private schools. Since school became mandatory, literacy and math competence have gradually declined.
As for the home schooled children that are "backward", they would be "backward" in a public school as well. But instead of being surrounded during the day by their loving family who only wants what's best for them, they will be teased, taunted, and ignored and may possibly end up a suicide statistic. After taking my son and daughter out of school, they blossomed and are now some of the most popular kids in their peer groups, which consist of public, private, and home schooled children. I ask them every year if they want to go back; they don't.
My children are more patriotic than any public school children we know. They know the Preamble, the Bill of Rights, etc., and say the Pledge of Allegiance in English every school day. They know that America is the greatest nation on the planet. Why should I send them to school, so that they may be told that we are "just like everyone else"? We are not. We are freedom's last stand.
I have a friend who is a teacher in a public school. She told me that one of her students would come to school with no shoes, another only ate meals at school (she used to send a small amount of food home with him for the weekend), another was taught at home that he should kill whites. She was actually beat up by a 5th grader and sustained a broken ankle that needed surgery. The school did nothing about these issues, but instead chose to harass a family that pulled their child from school to cyber school. So, why doesn't the government just take away all kids, put them in institutions, and "educate" them the way they want? The above children were public schooled, but were they socially adjusted? What about their socialization? I bet they can all put condoms on a cucumber, though. The schools should worry more about the students they have and not about the ones that choose to bypass all of this garbage.
I don't believe home schooling is the ONLY way. Many kids do well in their schools. If they're happy and you're happy, leave them there. I don't care. Just don't try to deny me the opportunity to educate my children the way I see fit. It works for us. My son is attending Northwestern University on a full-ride scholarship in Biomedical Engineering ($58,000 per year); need I say more?
As for the home schooled children that are "backward", they would be "backward" in a public school as well. But instead of being surrounded during the day by their loving family who only wants what's best for them, they will be teased, taunted, and ignored and may possibly end up a suicide statistic. After taking my son and daughter out of school, they blossomed and are now some of the most popular kids in their peer groups, which consist of public, private, and home schooled children. I ask them every year if they want to go back; they don't.
My children are more patriotic than any public school children we know. They know the Preamble, the Bill of Rights, etc., and say the Pledge of Allegiance in English every school day. They know that America is the greatest nation on the planet. Why should I send them to school, so that they may be told that we are "just like everyone else"? We are not. We are freedom's last stand.
I have a friend who is a teacher in a public school. She told me that one of her students would come to school with no shoes, another only ate meals at school (she used to send a small amount of food home with him for the weekend), another was taught at home that he should kill whites. She was actually beat up by a 5th grader and sustained a broken ankle that needed surgery. The school did nothing about these issues, but instead chose to harass a family that pulled their child from school to cyber school. So, why doesn't the government just take away all kids, put them in institutions, and "educate" them the way they want? The above children were public schooled, but were they socially adjusted? What about their socialization? I bet they can all put condoms on a cucumber, though. The schools should worry more about the students they have and not about the ones that choose to bypass all of this garbage.
I don't believe home schooling is the ONLY way. Many kids do well in their schools. If they're happy and you're happy, leave them there. I don't care. Just don't try to deny me the opportunity to educate my children the way I see fit. It works for us. My son is attending Northwestern University on a full-ride scholarship in Biomedical Engineering ($58,000 per year); need I say more?
8.21.2012 | 12:06am
Aaron says:
I've read every single comment and not ont, NOT ONE mentioned the Soviet education system. As a social studies teacher, I had the task of previewing many, many different textbooks for differing courses. Those that studied the Soviet Union ALL praised the greatness and effectiveness of their educational system: completely state controlled, no allowance for religious or homeschooling. The curricula was nothing short of communist propaganda.
This system is being praised and pushed not only by the textbook companies, but by the teachers unions. I should know, because as a teacher in a "fair share" state, I was all but forced to be a member and get their publications. The teachers unions view private schools and homeschooling as the enemy. They lobby continuously for increased restrictions on both in many, many states, recently California (whose Supreme Court recently ruled that homeschooling parents need either a Masters' degree in education, previous educational experience, or a college degree in some educational field).
This is actually happening. This is not tinfoil hat type stuff. I've seen it, and I've felt the wrath of those local union thugs that don't like it when I don't teach the "party-approved truth". That is why I left.
This system is being praised and pushed not only by the textbook companies, but by the teachers unions. I should know, because as a teacher in a "fair share" state, I was all but forced to be a member and get their publications. The teachers unions view private schools and homeschooling as the enemy. They lobby continuously for increased restrictions on both in many, many states, recently California (whose Supreme Court recently ruled that homeschooling parents need either a Masters' degree in education, previous educational experience, or a college degree in some educational field).
This is actually happening. This is not tinfoil hat type stuff. I've seen it, and I've felt the wrath of those local union thugs that don't like it when I don't teach the "party-approved truth". That is why I left.
8.21.2012 | 12:27am
katy says:
Rick, I'm happy you have a nearby public school with excellent education. Some of us aren't so fortunate--and usually the areas with the worst public schools have the highest home school rate.
The schools in our city are a cross between prisons and daycare centers--at one of the "good" ones in the city, a kid figured out how to turn off all the lights with his library card (they were supposed to only be activated by teachers' magnetic ID strips, but glitch in that, I guess). My friend, who was subbing, said it was chaos, kids shoving, kicking, screaming, biting, stealing. She says something like this happens once a week--and there are fights in the parking lot every day. Teachers aren't allowed to break them up; they have to call the police. Not to be melodramatic, but a family friend who was a principal at a middle school (one of the "bad" ones) said that job was more stressful--and felt more consistently dangerous-- than fighting at Fallujah.
So the home school community in our city is huge. Our private schools aren't bad (my dad works at one), but expensive, and the religious ones don't seem too interested in teaching their respective confessions. The quality doesn't match the price, IMHO.
Our state is liberal (home state of the President--hollah! I didn't vote for him, but it's kind of nice to have our guy in there.) But we have some of the most relaxed home school laws in the country. I think it's because our schools are so bad.
The good news is there is a resurgence of classical education, both in the home school and parochial school levels (even some secular ones, I believe). There are a number of day schools in the 'burbs (perhaps meeting 3-4 days a week) with a curriculum that could easily be standardized and provided as "proof" that the kids are getting an acceptable education. I would be happy to go back and get my license (in retrospect it was foolish of me not too, since it just meant some extra theory and practice classes), start working on making my church's school better....etc.
All the anecdotal evidence (including my own) shows each state--nay, district--has it's own problems (or perhaps none at all). These problems can't be solved at a federal level, because they aren't a national problem. They are families and communities problems.
The schools in our city are a cross between prisons and daycare centers--at one of the "good" ones in the city, a kid figured out how to turn off all the lights with his library card (they were supposed to only be activated by teachers' magnetic ID strips, but glitch in that, I guess). My friend, who was subbing, said it was chaos, kids shoving, kicking, screaming, biting, stealing. She says something like this happens once a week--and there are fights in the parking lot every day. Teachers aren't allowed to break them up; they have to call the police. Not to be melodramatic, but a family friend who was a principal at a middle school (one of the "bad" ones) said that job was more stressful--and felt more consistently dangerous-- than fighting at Fallujah.
So the home school community in our city is huge. Our private schools aren't bad (my dad works at one), but expensive, and the religious ones don't seem too interested in teaching their respective confessions. The quality doesn't match the price, IMHO.
Our state is liberal (home state of the President--hollah! I didn't vote for him, but it's kind of nice to have our guy in there.) But we have some of the most relaxed home school laws in the country. I think it's because our schools are so bad.
The good news is there is a resurgence of classical education, both in the home school and parochial school levels (even some secular ones, I believe). There are a number of day schools in the 'burbs (perhaps meeting 3-4 days a week) with a curriculum that could easily be standardized and provided as "proof" that the kids are getting an acceptable education. I would be happy to go back and get my license (in retrospect it was foolish of me not too, since it just meant some extra theory and practice classes), start working on making my church's school better....etc.
All the anecdotal evidence (including my own) shows each state--nay, district--has it's own problems (or perhaps none at all). These problems can't be solved at a federal level, because they aren't a national problem. They are families and communities problems.
8.21.2012 | 12:19pm
Katy says:
"My children are more patriotic than any public school children we know. They know the Preamble, the Bill of Rights, etc., and say the Pledge of Allegiance in English every school day. They know that America is the greatest nation on the planet. Why should I send them to school, so that they may be told that we are "just like everyone else"? We are not. We are freedom's last stand."
My kids will probably memorize the preamble and Bill of Rights; I'm not so excited about the PofA on philosophical grounds, although I recited it at my own home school. The rest they will probably NOT learn, since I am not an exceptionalist. And I would keep them out of school lest they DO learn that we are the world's only hope--we ARE like everyone else, just not worse than everyone else. They will be patriotic because they will love the land their ancestors settled and love their neighbors and our culture and traditions, and want to defend and keep our way of life. That's a good reason to home school.
My kids will probably memorize the preamble and Bill of Rights; I'm not so excited about the PofA on philosophical grounds, although I recited it at my own home school. The rest they will probably NOT learn, since I am not an exceptionalist. And I would keep them out of school lest they DO learn that we are the world's only hope--we ARE like everyone else, just not worse than everyone else. They will be patriotic because they will love the land their ancestors settled and love their neighbors and our culture and traditions, and want to defend and keep our way of life. That's a good reason to home school.
8.22.2012 | 3:47am
Tim Heule says:
I am living in Sweden, - there is no home schooling alowed. Private schools are alowed nowaday, but the exact content of the teaching is stricktly monitored of the state. (Private schools aim often to make a profit on tax money.) No room for classical christian teaching!
8.22.2012 | 4:00am
Rick says:
@Katy:
I have no doubt that the chamber of horrors you depict as public schools in your Illinois city (Chicago?) is accurate. Just as I have no doubt that my portrayal of the admirable school system in our Kentucky small town is accurate. Both are realities. I'm not sure I would blame the federal government for your school system, though. As others have pointed out, the quality of the schools rests largely with the quality of the families producing the children who go to them, and the family in these afflicted urban poverty areas has basically disintegrated. The social fabric is completely shredded, and Washington is impotent to restore it. So, I would look to Washington as neither savior nor scapegoat. The answer lies elsewhere.
@Aaron:
If you have read a lot of (old) sources that expressed admiration for the Soviet educational system, that may be because, communist propaganda aside, they had about the most rigorous and effective academics of any nation on earth. They were famous for the quality of their scientific education in particular. Russia still maintains exceptional public educational standards. My wife has a Russian colleague in the English department at our university whose daughter attended our high school. I once asked the daughter what she thought of the education here, compared with what she was used to in Russia. "Oh, it's MUCH more difficult in a Russian school," she said. "But I think the American kids have more fun." Well, we are pretty good at fun, I'll have to admit, but the Russian high school graduates can run circles around our kids in science and math.
@E.L.G:
Let's take your superpatriotic educational philosophy and pretend its being espoused by the students and teachers in, say, Germany, circa 1937:
"My children are more patriotic than any other Germans. They know the history of the Teutonic Knights, the platform of the Nazi Party, and they sing "Deutschland Uber Alles" (Germany Above All) every school day. And they proudly use only the German language. Why should they learn any other? They know that Germany is the greatest nation on the planet. Why should I send them to liberal schools that will tell them that we are 'just like everyone else?' We are not. We are Germans and we are pure Aryans. We are true civilization's last stand."
How does it sound from that perspective?
I have no doubt that the chamber of horrors you depict as public schools in your Illinois city (Chicago?) is accurate. Just as I have no doubt that my portrayal of the admirable school system in our Kentucky small town is accurate. Both are realities. I'm not sure I would blame the federal government for your school system, though. As others have pointed out, the quality of the schools rests largely with the quality of the families producing the children who go to them, and the family in these afflicted urban poverty areas has basically disintegrated. The social fabric is completely shredded, and Washington is impotent to restore it. So, I would look to Washington as neither savior nor scapegoat. The answer lies elsewhere.
@Aaron:
If you have read a lot of (old) sources that expressed admiration for the Soviet educational system, that may be because, communist propaganda aside, they had about the most rigorous and effective academics of any nation on earth. They were famous for the quality of their scientific education in particular. Russia still maintains exceptional public educational standards. My wife has a Russian colleague in the English department at our university whose daughter attended our high school. I once asked the daughter what she thought of the education here, compared with what she was used to in Russia. "Oh, it's MUCH more difficult in a Russian school," she said. "But I think the American kids have more fun." Well, we are pretty good at fun, I'll have to admit, but the Russian high school graduates can run circles around our kids in science and math.
@E.L.G:
Let's take your superpatriotic educational philosophy and pretend its being espoused by the students and teachers in, say, Germany, circa 1937:
"My children are more patriotic than any other Germans. They know the history of the Teutonic Knights, the platform of the Nazi Party, and they sing "Deutschland Uber Alles" (Germany Above All) every school day. And they proudly use only the German language. Why should they learn any other? They know that Germany is the greatest nation on the planet. Why should I send them to liberal schools that will tell them that we are 'just like everyone else?' We are not. We are Germans and we are pure Aryans. We are true civilization's last stand."
How does it sound from that perspective?
8.23.2012 | 1:33pm
Erin says:
@William L Harnist,
My children do not exist to ensure the funding of any government institution, public schools included.
Who better to provide a rich and thorough education for a child than the parents who love their children more than they love themselves? I do not want my children to be merely dollar signs for a sub-par government institution.
My children do not exist to ensure the funding of any government institution, public schools included.
Who better to provide a rich and thorough education for a child than the parents who love their children more than they love themselves? I do not want my children to be merely dollar signs for a sub-par government institution.
8.25.2012 | 6:04am
Teri says:
The minimal standard will include academic benchmarks as well as an assurance that children are exposed to and engaged with ideas, values, and beliefs that are different from those of the parents. So a big NO!
From our experience here in rural Kentucky, where homeschooling is fairly popular, we can say that there are homeschoolers and there are homeschoolers. Some seem to do a fine job of it, but in other cases, it is highly questionable whether the kids are getting an adequate, well-rounded educational experience. We know some homeschooled kids who turn up in our university here who do, in fact, seem poorly socialized. We took a group of university students on a summer educational excursion to Mexico a few years ago, and there was one young woman who had the hardest time engaging with the group. She spent a lot of time by herself, sometimes crying, and finally broke down to my wife, saying, "I was homeschooled. I don't know how to make friends!"
I couldn't object to a reasonable degree of intelligent (if possible) government oversight of homeschooling to ensure that the kids get a scholastically rigorous and socially well-rounded experience. And, of course, that would not need to tamper in any way with their religious education.