The home-schooling revolution: Williams asks parents to take children out of public schools

It is obviously your sense that the distinguishing characteristic of 'public schools' is that they operate a forced socialization scheme under the watchful eye of state functionaries trained for this express purpose, as opposed to the purpose of actually educating their charges in mathematics or english composition, for instance.

That you find this a quite reasonable social project speaks volumes, not about you particularly, but about the consequences of two generations of Americans already processed through this socialist institution. It will probably be up to the children to rescue themselves from this barbaric oppression, since I think that your views are definitely those of the majority of Americans.

Public Education is the main instrument of American Socialism, and so ought to be opposed by those who cherish liberty.

I cannot believe no one has responded to your comments. You make some really interesting statements. I got sidetracked by that anti-homeschooler, r9.
Now about your comments. It would be too long to go into here on this thread about some</> anti HSLDA people I am aware of--it is difficult for me to discern if you fall into that group. Mainly it seems to be a power, ego struggle with HSLDA. I do not worship HSLDA nor do I think they are not without their faults. In fact your post causes me to wonder further if they do not at times keep themselves in business by moving the process more slowly than perhaps it needs to. I do not know and I do not want to judge their character. I mean they wouldn't want to send themselves out of business.
But, about your comments in Michigan. I never heard of any of this. You said: It took a lot of months to show people how the status quo was a wonderful place to be.
Wasn't the status quo pretty bad pre 1996? I mean the law was awful in Michigan. Perhaps I am not understanding your comments or where you are coming from? Did you want to keep the very restrictive homeschooling laws in place at the time?
Right now here in Maine HSLDA is fighting our Commissioner who is making up rules as he goes along. He has truly gone off the deep end. As a result, the state support group and HSLDA are working on a legislative bill that would greatly reduce the regulations in Maine to a simple 'Notice of Intent'. This is a great thing! At this point Maine is one of 4 states that require homeschoolers to achieve permission to homeschool. HSLDA wrote this to us homeschoolers in Maine asking that all of us write this on our application:
HSLDA said, "Finally, we do not acknowledge that the state truly has the authority to "approve" a family's decision to educate their own children. This is because we believe the right to educate one's own children is protected under the U.S. Constitution independent of any requirements a state may impose.
So as to not give implied support to the idea of "approval", you may want to avoid the words "approve" or "approval" in any correspondence with the Department. If you have not yet filed your notice, we recommend that on page 2 of the Equivalent Instruction form you consider crossing out the sentence, "If this proposal is approved, we agree to abide by its terms" and replacing it with, "We hereby notify the Department of our intention to home school our child according to the following plan."
In his inauguration speech, John F. Kennedy said: "The same revolutionary belief for which our forebears fought is still at issue around the globe, the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God." If you share this belief, we encourage you to attach the following statement to your home school notice, either as a separate sheet or written on the notice itself: "We believe that our right to educate our children ourselves comes from God and is protected under the U.S. Constitution. We are submitting information about our home school program not because we believe we need the state's approval, but simply so you may be aware of our plans."
Also, I'm interested in a term you used in your post. What do you mean by 'institutionalized homeschooling' mean? I've not heard of this before.

Another question (I'm sorry I'm so long here). What is your solution to not using HSLDA? I mean I do not know the laws nor do I know the politics involved with getting the things I want. Who has the time? Homeschoolers are busy people--as you well know. What's the solution? Again, I hope my tone conveys to you that I am truly interested in what you have to say and am not being particularly positive or negative about HSLDA in discussion with you. I'm genuinely interested in your opinion on this.

I've not seen anyone on this thread 'foaming at the mouth.' Interesting observation.

Look more closely at my comments and the responses to them. My only real point is that the "socialization" aspect of public school is real -- kids in a public school setting see, know, and deal with kids and parents from a variety of backgrounds, in a way that homeschoolers are unlikely ever to experience. I further stated that there is some value to this "socialization," and that home schoolers pay a price by isolating their children from it.

And that's it -- it's not a reason to not home school, it's not an attack on home schooling, it is simply something that's true.

Now look at the replies: many defend the isolation; others deny that their kids lose anything by not seeing the slice of life; still others accuse me of being biased against home schooling (despite my assertions to the contrary); and so on.

IMHO these people are not interested in having a real discussion about whether public education has any redeeming features -- to them, apparently, it's uniformly and always worse than home schooling. It is, in part, an ideology: a set of assumptions on their part that may not be questioned.

There's no point in trying to discuss anything with these folks, because their evidence even to concede an obvious point it evidence of their close-mindedness.

I find it enlightening that you yourself stated that many public schools are failing... but that the answer is not to pull our kids out.

We tried home-schooling for a while with our daughter -- and for a variety of reasons it did not work. Happily, the public schools in our area are pretty good. We supplement and correct where the public schools fall short, and our kids do well -- thus, no need to pull the kids out.

Maybe you could try looking at people for what they are. Not through your "fear-colored glasses." Or not.

Huh?

After reading all of this quite long thread, I failed to see how one could consider R9 to be "anti-home schooling." He simply identified some pros and cons of each system.

We make fun of liberals who react with emotion instead of facts, yet we attack a fellow conservative for not toeing the line and repeating back the dogma.

At no point did R9 state that HSing was bad, evil, or useless. I happen to agree with him that there is some value in having kids interact with a broad range of others from different backgrounds, cultures, and religion. However, this does not mean it is the best situation for every child. Some family set ups are such that a child will interact with an even broader range under his/her parents supervision. Some will sit in front of the television all day. I know of a situation in which this is what is happening to a hs'd boy. This kiddo was in public schools for several years, and that was a bad situation for him also. He probably needs a small group private school, but his parents see it differently. They have told me that he learns enough from his mothers tutoring that it doesn't matter if he watches 10+ hours of t.v. a day. That is a choice these parents have made. Who knows, he might be better off where he is now, but it's not my place to decide.

As far as public schools go, they are not all bad. I happen to teach in one that is wonderful in so many respects. As an example--on my bulletin board is a hand made bookmark from the PTO. It has a few stickers on it, and a hand lettered Bible verse. On the back it says, "Please remember that there are parents that pray for you every day. We appreciate what you do for our children." This was given to each teacher. This type of support goes on all year long.

Would this happen at every school--of course not. In some schools these parents would probably be sued. I would not teach in those schools, nor would I send my children. My sister-in-law lives in CA. According to her, the neighborhood schools are abysmal. She will hs until high school, and then both will go to a Lutheran high school in Wisconsin. Her two little ones are awesome--very advanced and very mature. I respect her for the great job she does.

I appreciate your thoughtful response. Without boring other folks on this thread, I will attempt to answer your questions in a direct, but short, way....

"Wasn't the status quo pretty bad pre 1996? I mean the law was awful in Michigan. Perhaps I am not understanding your comments or where you are coming from? Did you want to keep the very restrictive homeschooling laws in place at the time?" In 1995 Michigan homeschoolers were under the regulations that had been affected by 3 Supreme Court cases that were decided in 1993: Clonlara v. MI State Board of Ed, Michigan v. Bennett and Michigan v. DeJonge. The month these decisions came out, Chris Klicka labeled Michigan one of the best states in the country for homeschooling. Nothing had changed by 1995 when HSLDA said Michigan was one of the worst. It took about 79 pages to do it, but the Michigan Homeschool Association publishes a book called, What's A Michigan Homeschooler To Do?, which shows that the state and local educrats have no regulatory authority over homeschool families. This book was used in 1997 to successfully dismiss a truancy case against a family in Macomb County. The arguments made in that case have been made repeatedly by homeschool families to successfully remind school officials across the state that they have no authority.
HSLDA chooses to interpret parts of the law differently, which leads to a feeling that there are threats to families. But those imagined threats have never materialized, to my knowledge.

" I'm interested in a term you used in your post. What do you mean by 'institutionalized homeschooling' mean? I've not heard of this before." By this, I mean the big business that has grown up around supplying curricula, record keeping methods, assessments, legislative lobbying and advocacy. I choose to homeschool apart from the business and regulatory influences that the "movement" has generated. I'm just raising my children.

"What is your solution to not using HSLDA? I mean I do not know the laws nor do I know the politics involved with getting the things I want. Who has the time?" What was Ben Franklin's quote about those who would trade freedom for security deserve neither? If we are capable of raising and educating our children, we are certainly capable of figuring out how to communicate with our own representatives in state capitols. Field trips, Civics, Government course are all handily intertwined with being responsible citizens. Every state has organizations of homeschooling families that are built on sharing such information and resources; seek out some of the 'other' groups and see what energy they have available for such activities.

In Michigan, we thought we didn't have time to lobby the legislators in Lansing. What we found after a few months is that we could do it, it wasn't awful - sometimes downright fun, they wanted to hear what we had to say, and no one can protect our freedoms better than we can.

I wish you well in your work, homeschoolers are already miles ahead in understanding personal responsiblity. Some may want to contract with others to help with the slack, but don't ever let someone take away work you are fully cable of doing. You wouldn't want someone else to raise your children or handle all communications with your spouse would you?

I'm not anti-anyone. I've talked with Mike and with Chris over the years, I think they're well-meaning men, but their agenda and commercial business sometimes interfere with important decisions I've made in my life, so I've reminded them occasionally that they're stepping on my toes.

Good luck to you in your efforts in Maine.

r seems to think that the rarified atmosphere of the government institution is superior to real life. My point was that, although there may be some merit in schooling with a lot of kids from different backgrounds, the fact that they are all the same age renders the experience an artificial one. In contrast, real life interaction is more natural. r9etb then implied that by including a child in one's everyday activities, I was,in effect, an elitist taking the child on field trips to observe exotic species.

My other point was that the social engineering the public school subjects the kids to far outweighs any "socialization" advantage. Just look at the curricula! Marxist, feminist, pacifist, environmentalist, you-name-itist claptrap where real content should be. How can this be good for them?

The purpose of education is not socialization. I know that goes against the sacred texts of the ed schools, but it's just not. These are not animals to be socialized to the herd, these are human beings whose minds, bodies, and souls need to be developed to their potential.

When r drops his sterotype of the wierdo hermit homeschooler, I will be glad to engage in a rational discussion.

Dear Miss AP,

After several years of serious consideration, I decided to relinquish pursuing a "career", including all the money and benefits that go with it, and instead obtained a part-time "job" that paid well but gave me the flexibility I needed to be with my two small children (age 9 months and 2 years).

Believe me, it hurt us financially. We're not spend-thrifts by any means, and I actually have the capacity to earn significantly more than my husband (approximately $16K a year more at my last position), but unexpected medical bills send us from the black to the red in just a few short months.

Nevertheless, I have embraced the role God gave me - that of wife and mother - and work part-time opposite hours from my husband so that no one except us is raising our kids.

Once we are back in the red and have rebuilt our nest egg, I will either stop working completely or cut back my hours a bit more.

But to address your main point - can two working parents still homeschool? Absolutely! I've already started my children's education with flash cards, learning games, ABC's, colors, reading, imagination games, drawing, and counting. I have every intention of continuing to homeschool them after I get home from my part-time job. I'll be setting up lesson plans for my husband to teach during the day while I'm at work.

Between the two of us, with our various strengths, our children can learn (and have already started to learn) a wide variety of things: I love politics, literature, science, and math. My husband loves music, horticulture, sports, and mechanics. We are both developing an active interest in history (although in different areas). I can draw on the strengths of friends for advanced sciences, as needed.

If some unforeseen circumstances force us to send our kids to a "public school," I will certainly be monitoring their assignments with a critical eye and vocal presence, and supplimenting their education at home. My husband is aghast at the level of "nonsense" being pushed on children under the guise of "education," so I expect him to be equally involved.

If you encourage a love of learning, for the sake of learning, early on, it will carry your child through the rest of their life. It doesn't matter if they are learning at 8:00 a.m. or 6:00 p.m., what matters is the level of involvement, praise, correction, and interaction they receive from their parents.

As someone who went to college to become a teacher, I know how to stand against the system. I also know that some of the best learning doesn't take place in the rigid environment of the classroom. For some learners (divergent, in particular), this type of environment is a learning death-knell!

Like, how to talk to the tattooed redneck down at the hardware store? Or the tough-talking guy on the garbage truck?

As I noted above, my primary problem with home-schooling has much more to do with over-protective parents than it does with the education they give their kids. There are all kinds of people out there, and real-world living demands that one know how to understand and deal with them. Those are lessons that can only be gained by being around people who are not like you.

How does public school teach your son how to deal with the redneck? What do they teach him about it?

I went to public school. I had my first real dealings with "rednecks" after I graduated and started working.

Please tell, how would my life have been improved by a different or improved public school curriculum? How would homeschooling have damaged my ability to relate to "rednecks?"

My point was that, although there may be some merit in schooling with a lot of kids from different backgrounds, the fact that they are all the same age renders the experience an artificial one. In contrast, real life interaction is more natural

Add to this the fact that very few public school classrooms have a diversity of backgrounds. Most schools draw their students from the same neighborhood which is normally populated by people of roughly the same socio-economic class. The richer people always move to more exclusive areas leaving the middle class behind. As the very poor climb to middle class status they are able to move into this neighborhood leaving the neighborhood with essentially the same make-up at all times. (of course white and rich flight tends to leave all urban neighborhoods slowly decaying but the decay is far too slow to provide diversity to the student body.)

I attended government high school years ago as my city (then) was undergoing court ordered forced bussing (I was going to say integration but since those bussed in never associated with those who were here first that would have been inaccurate), my classes were all composed of people essentially like myself. Of course there were the jocks and the greaser types and the druggies but all-in-all we were pretty much the same. Outside the school is where you met different people. The rich kids didn't go to my school, their parents moved them to private school or to the suburbs as quickly as they could afford it. The greatly poor kids couldn't afford to live in our school district either.

That said let me ask one question. What is the value of diversity in the first place? What value is gained by my child by sharing class space with people whose values are diametrically opposed to his? What is my child to learn from people who have nothing in common with him?

Contrast the 'diversity' of the public schools to the meltiong pot of the church where he meets people of all races, nationalities and socio-economic classes who have in comman a love for God and country. My children get all the 'socialisation' they need in church under direct parental supervision. They don't need to be exposed to NEA sponsored SAD workshops or "Islam is the religion of peace' propaganda.

Public schools are bad precisely because they are public. Parental control (and allowed input) is almost totally lacking. In older days when the schools were locally controlled this was not necessarily a bad thing as the mores of the local community would be somewhat similar to the mores of the parents living in those communities. Unfortunately now the state and/or federal requirements imposed on the public schools warp the values taught in those schools in many cases 180 degrees away from the parents values. (as an example, most NEA public schools support SAD as a valid lifestyle and pre-natal murder as a woman's right) So we are left with the public schools, because they are public, teaching our children the exact opposite of what we want them to learn.

This lack of total local control has no solution but to close all the public schools and reopen local private or home schools in their place.

God Save America (Please)

I'm not anti-anyone. I've talked with Mike and with Chris over the years, I think they're well-meaning men, but their agenda and commercial business sometimes interfere with important decisions I've made in my life, so I've reminded them occasionally that they're stepping on my toes.

Hi Pinz, how ya doin? I'm not as kind in my assessment of HSLDA as you darlin. They were on their way to causing the family in Macomb Co. a whole pile a trouble and it was completely unnecesary. It wasn't that they didn't understand the law either, even the grandmother was able to understand by the way they wrote the letter to the school officials HSLDA was asking her to do something in one part of the letter they were saying in another part of the letter she wasn't required to do!!!! I chaulk it up to arrogance.

Unfortunately, in the big fight which may come to Michigan if Jennifer Granholm is elected Gov. HSLDA may prove a useful ally. Here in Michigan many of us realize we have to watch them VERY closely when that happens.

I don't think I disagree with you on that one, Diva.

We can all be more or less tolerant of buttinski's on any given day, depending on where we've placed our toes that day. :-)

There does seem to be a difference in how lawyers respond to mulitple challenges depending, I guess, on how they perceive the client, the DA of that particular area, and what's on top of their agenda that day. Very pragmatic.

I guess that's partly why I would rather rely on other parents in the state to advise and support me, because we all know that we're in this battle for the long haul, and we all have to live with the consequences of one another's actions. Most lawyers, even those who build their practice on 'helping' homeschool families, can walk away, perhaps out of state, with their check once it's over, win or lose.

BTW, At least if Granholm wins, the lines for and against homeschoolers will be drawn clearly. If Posthumous wins, Michigan homeschoolers may end up having to fight friends to protect their own children again. Not a happy prospect.

Don't forget, that law in 1995 was introduced by a Republican in a Republican run House, signed by a Republican Governor. As a former talk radio host out of Detroit used to remind folks, "A Statist is a Statist."

Take care, Diva, keep fighting the good fight.

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.