A friend of mine wrote a post lately where she spoke out against California’s ruling that homeschooling is a crime. Since I know she and her husband enjoy a good debate, and this issue is something my wife and I talk about pretty often, I have decided to chime in.
My wife and I have some acquaintances who are either homeschooling their children, plan to homeschool, or have been home schooled. Let me just say right off the bat that even though we disagree with those decisions, we love them all and do not think any less of them.
Homeschooling is very popular among conservative, fundamentalist Christians. There is a commonly-held view among them that some things taught in public schools (such as evolution and gender identity) are wrong or that the social interactions with other kids at school are too dangerous. In the true spirit of American individualism, the parents choose to withdraw their children from public schools and either teach them themselves or enroll them in a private Christian school. As a Christian who may someday have children, I can easily understand how keeping my child out of a public school would seem beneficial. However, I keep coming back to the conclusion that doing so would be irresponsible to my child and to society.
Just as it is impractical for one to build their own roads, sewer system, and power plant, it is impractical for one to take on the duty of a child’s teacher in all subjects for every age level. Technology and human collective knowledge have progressed to the point where we must depend on others to help us out. This includes teaching. I can choose not to depend on the city to provide my water, but my quality of life will be significantly lower, if not outright unhealthy. I can choose to try and teach my son Geometry, but in reality, I will fail and end up telling him to read the book. If he doesn’t understand the book, well, he’s just out of luck, unless he’s a genius. Where does this leave the non-genius children who have inadequate teachers? The homeschooler will argue that there are plenty of under-qualified teachers in the public school system. This leads us to my second point.
Parents need to be involved with their child’s education. For too many parents, school is “daycare with benefits.” Not many are willing to take on the responsibility of keeping teachers personally accountable. They’d much rather have congress whip together a No Child Left Behind Act that institutes ineffective standardized testing and sacrifices deep learning experiences for learning what bubbles to fill in on the test. An ideal school system would involve parental and student feedback that weeds out ineffective teachers and sets policies for what is taught. Furthermore, it is very telling that the students who typically do the worst in school are the ones whose parents are not involved. The problems with the public school system are not going to be solved by acts of congress, just as poverty will never be eliminated through welfare programs. It requires community participation.
While withdrawing from a social institution may seem to provide short-term benefits, the effects are always negative for all parties. The poor always suffer the most as a result. For example, as middle class white people withdrew from urban areas to live in the suburbs, urban neighborhoods and schools severely deteriorated. They’re caught in a downward spiral of needing investment, but lacking the tax income to provide that investment. The only way out is for affluent neighbors to invest. Similarly, if all concerned parents withdraw from public schools, the majority who are left in the public schools will be left to rot in an unchecked system of under-qualified teachers teaching moral ambiguity. Wait, that’s already happening…
Sidebar: It was interesting to me, learning about the run-up to the Civil War, to hear what the was reason for pro-Unionists to keep the South from seceding. Their reasoning went as follows: If the losing political minority withdraws from a system of government every time a law is passed against them, the law will have no meaning because all of those who are opposed to a law are essentially choosing not to follow it. If I am pro-murder, I will just secede from the Union and murder will be legal for me. It’s another example of how institutions fail when no one wants to participate.
Why do we care about society? The typical right-wing Christian mindset says that we are all sinners and that the world is hopelessly lost to corruption, violence, and poverty. Since there is no hope for society, better for me to live in a shack in the woods where I can read my bible and live a Godly life, far away from the influence of the evil world. I used to hold this view myself. However, it is not what Jesus taught.
Jesus’ first recorded miracle is actually a clue to us as to what His plan is for us:
On the third day a wedding took place at Cana in Galilee. Jesus’ mother was there, and Jesus and his disciples had also been invited to the wedding. When the wine was gone, Jesus’ mother said to him, “They have no more wine.”
“Dear woman, why do you involve me?” Jesus replied, “My time has not yet come.”
His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.”
Nearby stood six stone water jars, the kind used by the Jews for ceremonial washing, each holding from twenty to thirty gallons.
Jesus said to the servants, “Fill the jars with water”; so they filled them to the brim.
Then he told them, “Now draw some out and take it to the master of the banquet.”
They did so, and the master of the banquet tasted the water that had been turned into wine. He did not realize where it had come from, though the servants who had drawn the water knew. Then he called the bridegroom aside and said, “Everyone brings out the choice wine first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink; but you have saved the best till now.”
This, the first of his miraculous signs, Jesus performed in Cana of Galilee. He thus revealed his glory, and his disciples put their faith in him.
This story is very rich in symbolism and John gives us some clues. First, the miracle happend “on the third day.” Second, the scene is a wedding. In the Old Testament, marriage was used symbolically to represent Israel’s (the bride) union and close relationship with God (the groom). Third, wine was used by Old Testament prophets to represent peace, fruitful labor, and blessings – heaven on earth. Essentially, this story boils down to servents bringing heaven on earth by following Jesus’ commands.
This story flatly contradicts the idea that the world is doomed to sinful decay. We have a part in doing God’s will to bring heaven on earth. Jesus initiated the moment where heaven and earth meet – are wedded – and bring hope to a fallen world.
Conservative Christians typically focus solely on their relationship with God. They strive to fulfill the first, greatest commandment – to love God with their whole soul, mind, and strength. However they many times miss the second part of that commandment – to love others as themselves. I spent most of my life ignoring that commandment and then most of the rest of my life only focusing on the first part of it. It’s easy to start a “God and me club,” but it’s hard to truly love others as God loves them. In fact, as you read the bible, you realize that if you are to truly love God, it follows naturally that you will love what he loves – justice, healing, the orphan, the widow, and your pointy-haired boss.
This brings us back to society. What is our mission as Christians who are trying to do God’s will and restore creation to its creator? Do we hide in our homeschools or do we try to help steer society toward what is good?
P.S. I take no credit for that little sermonette. It was lifted directly from what I remember from one of Rob Bell’s and from the book Walking With the Poor.
I agree with what you say about community involvement being the way to improve things. But I also disagree with a lot of what you say because I think your statement is too bold, too narrow minded. You are only looking at the polar opposites. What about the parents who want to home school their children/put them in private school for the primary years? Many do this because children learn at different paces. Or some feel that it’s a crucial age for having godly mentors and when they are a little older they are ready to enter the public ’sector’ to work out their faith/be a witness. What about the child who developmentally isn’t able to read well until 3rd grade but after succeed academically? They spend several years in school feeling dumb, which often has a lasting effect, when they could have been taught at home at their own pace and when ready gone to school.
I’m not saying that homeschooling is the right/best option and I do think there needs to be better parameters on it. There are parents & curriculum’s that can educate children better than your local public school but there are also parents who shouldn’t homeschool and the kids suffer.
To use your quote:
“Do we hide in our homeschools or do we try to help steer society toward what is good?”
I don’t think this is an either or situation, yes many do view it that way but isn’t there also the ability to better prepare our children at young ages to go out and ’steer society’ when a parent feels their feet are a little less shaky or are developmentally ready to run alongside their peers.
Derek,
I enjoy a good debate too, so see our blog for my rebuttal, which I hope you will take in the same spirit you intend yours.
Brian
Sarah, thanks for your response!
What about the parents who want to home school their children/put them in private school for the primary years? Many do this because children learn at different paces.…What about the child who developmentally isn’t able to read well until 3rd grade but after succeed academically?
I would say that perhaps there’s more room in the public education system to accommodate different paces of learning. I would rather see a more flexible public system than it splinter into homeschooling.
Or some feel that it’s a crucial age for having godly mentors and when they are a little older they are ready to enter the public ’sector’ to work out their faith/be a witness.
This seems to be the strongest argument for Christian parents. However, if 95% of Christian children are home schooled, where does that leave the 5% of Christian children who want to have good Christian friends in public schools?
Derek,
You raise some good points that really challenge my point-of-view on this matter. Thanks for writing them.
Technology and human collective knowledge have progressed to the point where we must depend on others to help us out. This includes teaching. I can choose not to depend on the city to provide my water, but my quality of life will be significantly lower, if not outright unhealthy. I can choose to try and teach my son Geometry, but in reality, I will fail and end up telling him to read the book.
I don’t think this assertion is true. The math teacher at the local high school may know more geometry than me, but that’s not a fair comparison. Remember that the local high school teacher has a lot more to deal with than teaching one student geometry. The real comparison is – can a math teacher teach geometry as well to my children, given that my children may make up 3% of the classroom, and much of the teacher’s classroom attention must be focused on discipline?
Remember, the stuff taught in primary and secondary school is general knowledge. I would expect anyone with a college degree from a good school in a rigorous major to be able to understand all of a high school curriculum with a small amount of review. Unless my high school was an exception (and I’ve seen plenty of evidence that it is not), the actual material that’s taught over 4 years is very, very little. In fact, little of the classroom time was even spent on teaching the material. I assert that I could teach my children more in 30 minutes than they would learn in an hour of public school. If that means I need to spend the other 30 minutes brushing up on the material for my own benefit, so be it.
Your post in general assumes that the point of public schools is primarily to educate our children. I’m not sure sure that’s the case. The argument otherwise would be too long to get into here, but I don’t think that should be taken as a given.
Finally, the crux of your argument – our responsibility to society – is a sobering one. I agree with you there. I do think that it may be possible to homeschool a child who will do more for society than if he or she spent their most intellectually fertile years stuck in the C&C bureaucracies that are most public schools, but that’s a very complex issue, and you’re right that we do have a responsibility to our community, and that’s something we should consider – the idea that we get a free pass on the responsibility when it comes to “our children” is poisonous and absurd.
I feel I should clarify one thing. My last comment certainly reveals my generally negative opinions to public schools. That said, I have nothing but respect and gratitude for those who make it their work to teach in them. Julie, along with several of my other teacher friends, are doing noble, important work – the real fault in the state of public schools, as far as I can tell, is in the failure of communities to support schools, financially and otherwise.
Some of the most talented, intelligent people I know are school teachers – people who could easily be making fortunes in finance, IT, or other fields, but who have chosen something more significant.
I also suspect that the model of teaching used in schools is really out-of-line with what we know about learning now, but I’m sure your wife knows much more than myself about that.
Derek, thanks for your response to my response. You definitely have some very good points. I’m not sure if I’ll have time to respond, but it was fun to make a foray into the fray. Much love.
Derek,
Do you have any examples of schools that have that kind of flexibility? I’ve certainly never seen one and only seen quite the opposite. I’m not going to let my children’s education and self-worth suffer just waiting for schools to adjust to kids who need different paces.
Alex is getting in to stuff gotta go.
So some of your comments have made me think more about the fine line between what is our role as parents. God has given some of us the gift of children and has also laid down commandments as to our responsibilities towards them. I think some of that affects how we view whose responsibility it is to educate them, etc. So you got me thinking but I’m not very intellectual so I probably won’t conclude anything in the near future. It’s up to each family really.
But as far as examples you asked for on Brian’s blog I have one for you.
My family –
My parents decided they wanted to put us in Christian schools while we were little for various reasons – I think mainly because of the importance of the early formative years with relation to our faith and godly examples. Nothing to do with evolution, etc. Their plan was to transfer us to public school when we were highschool age (I probably would have done middle school but I wasn’t the parent). So my sister was enrolled in public highschool. Her 1st year she received a 4.0 without studying and was not academically challenged. In fact she knew more German that her German teacher. So rather than have her get behind (the school had a long history of being horrible academically) academically they enrolled her in the private highschool. They were not impressed with the schools Christian education but it was ranked 1 of the top 10 schools in the midwest. This was the days before you could enroll your child in a school outside your neighborhood. My sister then went on to a public university and spent 9 years ministering to the poor in the inner city of Pittsburgh.
That same highschool has now started a montessori program for kids who are above their classmates. So in order to keep them challenged academically they are removed from the general public anyways and put on their own educational track.
Derek told me about this post, but I’m just getting around to reading everything. I have a few thoughts to contribute on the subject, from a public teacher’s perspective. While I don’t agree with Derek about everything, I will admit that I am a big fan of public education, in general, although I recognize that our current system has flaws.
1. I can only imagine how difficult it must be for a parent to decide between home school and public school. Much of that decision must primarily be made according to the schools in your district, your financial status, your confidence in teaching effectively, and even your relationship with your child.
2. As to the role of a teacher, many people who have commented have assumed that just because a person has an understanding of the subject matter, that he/she will be able to explain that information effectively to another person, or in other words, to teach. For example, while I am capable of doing long division, I am not sure that I would be able to explain it to a 4th grader very easily. Also, a teacher (whether a parent or a teacher in a school) should be able to adapt to multiple (and I seriously mean multiple) ways of explaining material in order for students to understand.
Often, it is difficult to explain something in a way that is different than the way we learned it or the way we understand it. This is one of the cool things about trained teachers. They receive specific, extensive training on how to do this. They learn how to adapt instruction to meet a variety of learners’ needs, as well training in how to break apart concepts and explain them in a way that is meaningful to the learner. While parents can certainly do this, or learn how to do this, I don’t think that teachers are given enough credit for this skill.
3. Another skill that trained teachers learn is how to provide meaningful experiences out of the concepts they are trying to teach. We know that children learn best when they can experience knowledge in a variety of ways- they read about it, they act it out, they create with it, they manipulate things and ideas. These experiences make the knowledge REAL. They are what make the concepts stick. Again, while homeschool parents are very capable of providing these experiences, this, too, can be difficult to understand all of a child’s learning modalities without training. I also recognize that there are plenty of trained teachers that neglect this in their own teaching. However, there are many more trained teachers who do a great job at this!
4. Finally, a little educational psychology as food for thought. Three of the main camps that describe how students learn are the behaviorists, the cognitivists, and the constructivists. While I don’t believe there is not one correct learning theory, I do believe that they can be combined, and each person brings his/her own viewpoint to the table.
Behaviorists basically view that teachers provide a situation, and the students will respond with a behavior. The behavior demonstrates the learning. The emphasis here is on the teacher providing the correct situation to get a response. This is not my personal favorite, as it seems a little Pavlovian.
Cognitivists encourage critical thinking. The teacher provides direct knowledge, as well as knowledge in which the students practice solving problems on their own. The emphasis is more on the individual developing knowledge according to his/her needs and abilities.
Constructivists believe that students learn best by “constructing” knowledge in a particular context, usually with other learners. Sometimes children can learn just as much from each other as they can from the teacher. The role of the teacher is to serve as a facilitator of learning within the social context.
I, personally, believe in a combination primarily of cognitivism and constructivism. Thus, I am a believer in public education (in theory) because I believe that in addition to helping children become critical thinkers, they must do so in the context of the world around them.
One more thing… as a product of, and a producer of, public education, I have felt at times limited by the system of public education, in which teachers are left with their hands tied by the bureaucracy of system that “knows more than they do.” I have also, at times, felt unable to express my faith to children because of the consequences that could occur if someone took offense. Sad, but true. I have also had the great honor of teaching many children, and seen the joys and successes that are achieved in public schools every day (please give public schools a little more credit for all that they do!). While there is no right or wrong answer to this situation, I do appreciate this discussion because I believe that both sides have a lot to learn from each other.
Ug. My brain hurts. There are many more thoughts, but I’m tired. I would love to hear your thoughts about my comments!