Posted on 03/17/2004 6:38:11 AM PST by gobucks
A revolution is happening in American education. As it grows in size, it should frighten teachers everywhere.
Just how bad are American schools? And how deeply do conservative Americans distrust their government? One answer to both these questions is provided by the growth of home-schooling. As many as 2m American students—one in 25—may now be being taught at home.
The growth of home-schooling is all the more remarkable when you consider two facts. The first is the commitment of the parents. They give up not just a free public education, but also often the chance of a second income as well, because one parent (usually the mother) has to stay at home to educate the children.
The Department of Education highlights the results of its survey: “Homeschooling in the United States: 1999”. See also the Home School Legal Defense Association.
The next is that the practice challenges most of the assumptions behind public education. For most of the past 150 years, compulsory mass education has been the hallmark of a civilised society. Sociologists such as Max Weber have hailed the state's domination of education as a natural corollary of “modernisation”. Yet in the most advanced country on the planet (on many measures), more than 2m parents insist that education ought to be the work of the family. How has this come about?
Faith's imperatives
The 2m figure comes from the Home School Legal Defence Association. The most recent (1999) survey by the Department of Education put the number at only 850,000. The chances are that the HSLDA is closer to the truth. Rod Paige, the education secretary, uses its figure in his speeches, and, although home-schoolers tend to refuse to answer government surveys, a wealth of anecdotal evidence suggests that home-schooling is on the rise.
The market for teaching materials and supplies for home-schoolers is worth at least $850m a year. More than three-quarters of universities now have policies for dealing with home-schooled children. Support networks have sprung up in hundreds of towns and cities across the country to allow parents to do everything from establishing science labs to forming sports teams and defending their rights and reputation. When J.C. Penney started selling a T-shirt in 2001 that featured “Home Skooled” with a picture of a trailer home, the store faced so many complaints that it withdrew the item from sale.
Home-schooling is a fairly recent phenomenon. When Ronald Reagan came to power, in 1981, it was illegal for parents to teach their own children in most states. Today it is a legal right in all 50 states. Twenty-eight states require home-schooled children to undergo some kind of official evaluation, either by taking standardised tests or submitting a portfolio of work. Thirteen states simply require parents to inform officials that they are going to teach their children at home. In Texas, a parent doesn't have to tell anyone anything.
The main reason why legal restrictions on home-schooling have been swept away across so much of America is the power of the Christian right. Not all home-schoolers, of course, are religious conservatives. One of the first advocates of home-schooling, John Holt, was a left-winger who regarded schools as instruments of the bureaucratic-industrial complex. A lively subdivision of the home-school movement, called “unschooling”, argues that children should more or less be left to educate themselves. And the number of black home-schoolers is growing rapidly.
Yet the Praetorian Guard of the home-schooling movement are social conservatives. They turned to home-schooling in the 1970s in response to what they saw as the school system's lurch to the secular left—and they still provide most of the movement's political muscle on Capitol Hill. Senator Rick Santorum home-schools his children—or, rather, his wife does. Another Republican home-schooler, Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave, sponsored a bill to clear up various legal confusions about grants and scholarships for home-schooled children.
George Bush has tried hard to keep home-schoolers on his side. During the 2000 campaign, he said: “In Texas we view home-schooling as something to be respected and something to be protected. Respected for the energy and commitment of loving mothers and loving fathers. Protected from the interference of government.” As president, he has held several receptions for home-schooled children in the White House.
Just as the teachers' unions provide so many of the Democrats' volunteers, home-schoolers are important Republican foot-soldiers. According to the HSLDA, 76% of home-schooled young people aged 18-24 vote in elections, compared with 29% in that age group in the general population. Home-schoolers are also significantly more likely to contribute to political campaigns and to work for candidates—normally Republican ones.
An education that works
So there is certainly an ideological edge to many home-schoolers. But do not be misled. First, this is a bottom-up movement with parents of whatever political stripe making individual decisions to withdraw their children (rather than following orders from higher up). Second, the movement has a utilitarian edge. Home-schoolers simply believe that they can offer their children better education at home.
One-to-one tuition, goes the argument, enables children to go at their own pace, rather than at a pace set for the convenience of teaching unions. And children can be taught “proper” subjects based on the Judeo-Christian tradition of learning, rather than politically correct flimflam. Some home-schoolers favour the classical notion of the trivium, with its three stages of grammar, dialectic and rhetoric (which requires children to learn Greek and Latin).
This sounds backward-looking, but home-schoolers claim that technology is on their side. The internet is making it ever easier to teach people at home, ever more teaching materials are available, and virtual communities now exist that allow home-schoolers to swap information.
The other factor working in home-schooling's favour is its own success. Many parents have been nervous about home-schooled children being isolated. With almost every town in America now boasting its own home-schooling network, that worry declines. Home-schooled children can play baseball with other home-schooled children; they can go on school trips; and so on.
What about academic standards? The home-schooling network buzzes with good news: a family with three home-schooled children at Harvard; a home-schooler with a bestselling novel; first, second and third place in the 2000 National Spelling Bee; a first university for home-schooled children (see article). Systematic evidence is more difficult to find.
There are certainly signs that home-schoolers are thriving. One recent survey by the HSLDA showed that three-quarters of home-educated adults aged 18-24 have taken college-level courses compared with 46% of the general population. But this is hardly conclusive. Home-schoolers do not have to report bad results. Moreover, home-schoolers may simply come from the more educated part of the population.
Yet these arguments point to change in the way the debate is unfolding. It is no longer about whether home-schooled children are losing out, but whether they are doing unfairly well. “Maybe we should subcontract all of public education to home-schoolers,” Bill Bennett, Mr Reagan's education secretary, once wondered mischievously. That looks unlikely. But America's home-schoolers represent an assault on public education that teachers everywhere should pay attention to.
They pinpoint the weak spots in the dam and we act based on their advice and comment. It's that many pairs of eyes kind of effectivity, focused on what is the most current threat to our rights.
Good for you folks on the Maine front.
I don't want that in the schools, and I'm careful not to do it on homeschool time. Now family time is another matter.
I hope you see my point.
I wonder how many home scholars it will take before there is serious political pressure for rebate vouchers of education tax money. When that threshold is crossed, watch for the NEA and Democrats to declare total war to defend their "no dollar left behind" system.
There are just a lot of rock throwers who's domicile is primarily composed of glass on this issue.
One must look in the mirror before pointing at others.
Reduced milk and lunches, matching monies, and such. But actual content and methods of teaching have nothing to do with them.
My sister in-law is an auditor for them. She flies around the country auditing stupid nickel for milk or reduced lunch paperwork.
Remember, the DOE was a gift from Carter to the unions and to enrich a bunch of federal eduparasite emplyees who's mandate has nothing to do with education itself. Reagan promised to bury the department and preside over it's funeral but he renigged. Funny that a guy who could stare down Gorbechev at a nuclear arms table backed down from cutting government employees and stupid cost shifting mechanisms.
This real issue is school choice to me.
We as parents have the right to choose what is best for our own children.
I have no issue with the decisions that other parents make for their children, they know their children better than I do.
And there are some really bad parents.
IMO,the NEA and the Department of Ed have done more to create the nanny state than any federal program,ever.
They create the nanny state,and then they look to parents to place the blame upon when the parents have become too lazy and too dependent.
Must be a Dad thing, dear friend. I have to be reminded periodically that homeschooling is a lifestyle... you do it all the time whether you realize it or not. I'm a little impatient with Jr. who likes to play (parent-approved) computer games. I see it as a waste of time.
However, after his hour of 101 Dalmations CD the other night, he had all sorts of questions about London. He wants to go to the Royal Museum, ride the underground, see Big Ben, which we may get to do one day if we can put back enough money.
The lesson is this: when you teach your child to be inquisitive and to examine things in his environment, that activity takes place even away from the books. In this case, "wasted time" contributed to education in a way that I wasn't expecting.
Continued good luck in your journey. All the best, Tonto
Could the schools use that money , even some of that money, for educational purposes? Department and of ED has as much to blame, for their bloated system as anyone.
Do you think inner city kids, for example,could benefit from computers, clean schools and highly paid and highly educated teachers?
I think our tax money could be put to better use,and I think the kids should be the ones who benefit from our tax money.
The Department of Ed. does see it that way.
A friend of mine has worked for ACT for about 23 years...I have some literature available if you'd like me to send it to you. Just freepmail if you're interested.
That may depend on the state university. www.act.org may have the answer for you.
Math, economics, political science, social studies, sports, and even art class and theatre(the correct spelling).
The computer case is highly overbitched. It's a waste of money and a duplicate cost, since most kids have a computer at home anyhoo.
Yep! In my opinion the schools should toss the $600 a copy text books with more color pictures than text and just use the local newspaper to teach from.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.