Rebuttal to “5 Reasons Why You Should Homeschool”

July 16th, 2007 by obsteve · 7 Comments

[Editor’s Note: This entry was originally left as a series of comments on my discussion board as a response to my post “5 Reasons Why You Should Homeschool.” With the contributor’s permission, I have copied it, unedited, to the blog side of my site so that it can receive the attention it deserves. I intend to answer these points in a future entry. When I do I will add links from here and back to here. For now, I’ll just say that my original entry was intended primarily for readers in the States since my personal knowledge of the education systems in other countries is lacking. I would also like to comment, that “5 Reasons Why You Should Homeschool” has been my most popular post by a wide margin. It averages over 50 hits per day which, for my humble little blog, is quite a few.]

Hi Ed, I am writing to request that you ammend the homeschooling article, because I believe it is misleading, both about teachers and about teaching.

I understand that you are in favour of home-schooling, but if your readers are to make up their minds, they really need to be presented with both sides of the argument.

So here’s my own rebuttal of some of your arguments, in segments.

1. I think you are wrong to assert that “children in public schools don’t learn to socialize at least not in a real-world sense.” Firstly I do not think there is a single “real world” sense of socialising, but contrary to what you suggest, in state schools you *do not* socialise only with other people who are your exact same age. This is blatently untrue. Children interact not only with those the same age, but also with adults- teachers in the classroom, senior management, auxilliary staff, visiting professionals, etc. They interact with older and younger children too, in the form of peer mentoring programs, buddy systems, extra-curricular sports, clubs, prefect systems, etc. There is a wide variety of human interaction at any number of levels in school- I would be very much more concerned for a child’s development if her socialising experience were dominated by single child-to-parent interaction.

Like you, I would heartily recommend standing in a school classroom, or corridoor, or dining hall, and also watching children in the playground and sports field for a realistic vision of what constitutes children socialising. It’s not all polite and nice, but it is socialising, and predominantly positive too. Children are learning vital interpersonal and intrapersonal life skills at a micro-level which they continue to develop into adulthood.

Perhaps we whould then compare this visit to a school with a visit to a home-schooler’s house to examine the level and variety of social exchanges undertaken by the student. Which situation gives the greater group variety/age variety/social challenge?

7:37 am
July 9, 2007

obsteve

2. You say “many of the things that are taught in public schools that are simply wrong”.

You will have to provide some references here, because, as a teacher and head of department for 10 years I have yet to see anything significant being taught wrong. Where errors in the teaching have been spotted, colleagues are quick, in my experience, to point them out.

As for “intentionally taught wrong”, this is a concept completely alien to my own experience. I don’t know about USA, but I would be hard pressed to find a teacher anywhere here that deliberately taught anything wrong! The shame of it!

You say that “if you send your children to be taught by someone else, someone else will have control over what your children are learning.”

Ideally, your children should have control overwhat they are learning. ‘Education’ aims for student autonomy in learning. Good teachers teach thinking skills, research skills, critical skills, creativity skills, etc, in our various domains, and none of us aims to ‘control’ a young mind- rather, you will find teachers complaining at children who wish to be ’spoon-fed’ their education. The best learning is ‘active learning’, in which children are involved in the decision making behind what-to-learn, and the teacher teaches the skills of how-to-learn.

You say, “at home, your children learn what you want them to learn.”

Like I said, ideally you want them to become autonomous in their own education. Whatever you want your child to learn, I suggest teaching them how-to-learn is a good place to start.

7:45 am
July 9, 2007

obsteve

3. “This brings me to one of the reasons I want to homeschool which is that frankly I am smarter than 99% of public school teachers.”

If you have a university degree in your specialist subject; and a postgraduate degree in education (including child development and learning theory); and you are up to date with contemporary Teaching and Learning Theory; and you regularly share best of practice with other educators in the field; and you attend several in-service training modules a year; then I’ll concede you are probably on a par with your average UK teacher.

But bear in mind that your child at school has the benefit of a large number of specialists in a large number of specialist areas. Graduates with mathematics honours, science honours, arts honours, languages, and sports, etc.

Here’s a basic analogy- who would win the quiz? you and your missus, or a team of 12 graduate teachers from a cross section of disciplines?

Honestly?

You say, “even the smartest teacher is constrained to teaching what the administration or board tells them.”

This is blatantly untrue. Nobody tells me what to teach, not the government; not the board; nobody. The unions would have a field day!

I teach what I believe the kids would benefit from learning. I am the specialist in my field of study, and the administration board respects that.

7:55 am
July 9, 2007

obsteve

4. “Your child will never be molested, murdered, assaulted at homeschool”

Aside from seeming like a slightly scaremongering tactic, it is also statistically untrue.

Figure it out- Do more kids get molested, murdered and assaulted in school or out? Do more kids get molested murdered and assaulted by a family member or a stranger?

You hear about the acts of aggression at school just like you hear about the big plane crashes. Less newsworthy car crashes kill more people, yet get reported less. And we are left with the fear of flying.

I have taught a number of young children for whom school is a welcome break from abuse at home. It does go on, and it goes on more than in school.

And, incidentally, at what age will you let your child out of your sights?

7:56 am
July 9, 2007

obsteve

5. You say “We want to instill our values… If we send him away, whose values will he be receiving? Who knows?”

Many schools now have websites with mission statements and clearly outlined principles. All schools are government inspected, These reports are also freely available.

Check them out, and if you don’t like the set of ‘values’ outlined, send him to another school. He’ll still be able to discuss those values with you, it’s not like a gulag or anything, he’ll be permitted a phone-call, or perhaps even be let out once in a while to see you!

7:58 am
July 9, 2007

obsteve

6. “5. One (or two) on one (or two)”

This is your best argument. One on one teaching is an excellent way of reinforcing learning. But constant one-on-one has got to be more than a little oppressive. Variation is what you need- whole group, small group, peer mentoring, one-to-one; the classroom provides all this- home teaching doesn’t.

If you thing your child lacks individual support at school, ask the school what they can do about it- they will be glad to accommodate. And any parent can help his or her child with reading or homework after school, one-to-one. Nobody’s stopping you. It’s fun! And, incidentally, the best schools and teachers have mentoring programs built into their system.

By all means, teach your own kids, you’ll have a great time together. However, it is vital that they interact with children their own age (or within their own zone of proximal development), so other activities should be provided where they can take a break from the potentially stifling experience of child-parent contact. Group collaborative learning and team-building are
vital skills your kid really doesn’t want to miss out on.

8:06 am
July 9, 2007

obsteve

7. State schooling is predominantly child-focussed, professionally led and executed, up-to-date with contemporary teaching-and-learning theory, packed with caring, dedicated experts in their field, and full of bright young kids exploding with creative energy. And it’s free! Who would want their kid to miss out on that?

I’m not saying it’s all rosy-perfect, Ed, but you painted an overly bleak and unneccesarily misleading picture which I hope to have redressed.

I have no problem with home schooling, nor the people who home-school their children, nor the home-schooled children themselves.

However, for your child’s sake, build in learning and playing time away from you, where they can ‘be’ with friends, and experiment with who they are.

And also do some research into teaching and learning theory, so as to maximise your child’s learning potential.

Thank you for reading, and I look forward to your reply.

Steve

Tags: Other Contributors

7 responses so far ↓

1 Steve Olson // Jul 17, 2007 at 2:28 pm

Steve should read “The Underground History of American Education” by John Taylor Gatto. The very premise that “Public Education” was created to help the poor masses is 180 degrees wrong. It was specifically designed 100 years ago for another purpose… to keep people infantile and dumb them down. Now I’m not saying that is what Steve and his cohorts are trying to do. I’m sure they try hard and mean well. But I am saying that when the ’system’ was designed that was its purpose. Most people don’t know that, but the designers stated it in plain clear words that are undeniable. WHile the ’system’ has changed some since then, at it’s core it is still the exact same ’system’ it was 100 years ago. My kids aren’t going near it.
2 Ed Snyder // Jul 18, 2007 at 12:02 am

Steve Olson,

I’m going to try to give Steve (the author) some benefit of the doubt since he’s in the UK and not the US. I am skeptical that it’s significantly different there, but I don’t know enough about their system to be able to argue my points.

I will say this, though: most US teachers would say the same things he says about our public education system, which is precisely why I remain a skeptic.
3 Ute // Jul 26, 2007 at 1:43 am

Steve, the fact is that homeschoolers across the country always do better in standardized testing than do their public schooled peers. In my humble opinion this is proof enough, that the specialists you mention don’t do the job they are supposed to do. Public school creates followers, homeschool creates leaders. If you are going to try to tell me that you are not bound by any kind of curriculum, and that you are completely free to teach your class whatever you like, then it is now your turn to provide some supporting evidence for this. I have not yet been to a country where this is true. And yes, I have seen and lived in a few places (being from Germany originally).

As for one-on-one teaching… it’s simply untrue that you can provide this in a classroom of 30 children. Even in a classroom of 15 children you will not be able to provide one-on-one attention to a child. Yes, maybe for 5 minutes. A homeschooler on the other hand, who is taught by their parent gets all the attention he needs. To provide more than that we get together for teaching coops, where the children learn to work in a team and adjust to not being alone with their parent.

How readers need to be presented both sides of the story is really beyond me. Almost every single reader of this blog probably went to public school and therefore KNOWS the one side quite well. It is the advantages of homeschooling that they need to find out about. And that is what is being provided here.

Kudos, Ed! I “stumbled” here and will bookmark your blog.
4 Steve Olson // Jul 27, 2007 at 10:49 am

Ute,
Another fascinating tidbit. All academic achievement gaps between races, ethnicities, and income levels disappear in home schooled children.

Is it possible that the institution of mass institutional forced schooling fosters racism?

I think it is.

Schools and prisons are the most racist places in America. If you kill the government school system, it will help kill racism.

As John Gatto so eloquently points out- the American Forced Schooling system was designed by a bunch of racist eugenicists. They designed it to specifically create division among people. I’m not saying the school administrators of today have the same agenda, but the system design created 100 years ago is essentially unchanged.
5 obsteve // Jul 30, 2007 at 5:17 pm

Hi Everyone, Obsteve here
There’s a lot of material here to wade through, so I will use the discussion forum to reply in more detail.

I would, however, like to restate that my intention is to persuade the author of the article to amend the original “5 reasons” article, because I believe it is misleading, both about teachers and about teaching.

My intention in this ‘rebuttal’ is not to argue about the efficacy of the state or homeschool method, but to question the grounds upon which Flada bases his arguments.

Essentially, I feel that 5 different reasons to homeschool could and should be proffered; I do not believe following reasons given by Flada, stand up to much scrutiny-

“children in public schools don’t learn to socialize at least not in a real-world sense”;

“many of the things that are taught in public schools that are simply wrong”;

“This brings me to one of the reasons I want to homeschool which is that frankly I am smarter than 99% of public school teachers”;

“Your child will never be molested, murdered, assaulted at homeschool”;

“We want to instill our values… If we send him away, whose values will he be receiving? Who knows?”

I’ll end by repeating, which is my main thrust, that *I’m not saying it’s all rosy-perfect, Ed, but you painted an overly bleak and unneccesarily misleading picture which I hope to have redressed.*
6 Fawn // Aug 29, 2007 at 9:43 am

Let’s face it. You do not need to amend your view.
This is about education.
To be an effective home schooler I think anyone would have read many articles about the subject. I don’t think anyone goes blindly into homeschooling without exploring all the issues.

Your blog is just one way to gleam another OPINION on the subject.

Let them have their own blog to post their Opinion on.

If I agree with the blog I hit the page many times to reinforce my decisions. If I don’t agree with the blogger I say…..well you know.

I don’t home school. There are benefits to having your kids in a school. Plus, All the pitfalls I’ve faced seem to only be platforms for teaching my kids. Usually, It just teaches my kids to think they have really stupid teachers but Hey.

Plus, I’m in a struggle with the school at this moment. If I home schooled I’m not sure I could teach my child to take up the sword (pen) and fight for what they believe. We are not just writing someone but actually having to face them and stand our ground.

You must keep your opinions. You do not need to change them to suit someone else view.

Plus, If your reader is going to home school then give them credit enough that they already have a list of pros and cons and educated themselves on the issue.

In other words, I take offense with what obsteve has said. As if Your readers aren’t intelligent enough to search out all sources. A home schooler or a parent involved with their child’s educational needs is wise enough to not need someone to present them with both sides.
7 Fawn // Aug 29, 2007 at 10:31 am

Oh yeah now for the rest of the blog. If you need more explanation just let me know. I have seen both sides.

My kids go to school and I know home schoolers. One parent with 8 kids in fact. Who does better socializing? The home schooler (Plus, My schooler does not intereact with adults. No he is scared of them! They are them. Authority. He doesn’t feel he can even stand up to them when he is right!)

You do not need to provide examples! He needs to watch the history channel more and NOVA! He needs to read the real story about Paul Revere. Though, I’m not sure how other countries teach world history.

I’ve sent papers back asking how the teacher can mark the paper wrong because even I can tell if the illustration is a BOY or a Girl and that the teacher should not go by their darn answer sheet that came with their book.
Plus, Merlin had an answer wrong. He was to put a W for all the pictures with a W at the start of the word. The teacher marked one wrong. I asked my son why he got it wrong. He said he thought the photo was the slice of a ORANGE and orange doesn’t start with W. I knew it was their version of a Wagon Wheel. Wheel starts with W.
As a home schooler you are able to not mark things wrong but figure out where the student is coming from.
Teachers do not have time.

If they didn’t want control then the teachers wouldn’t be trying to control this parent. (Um Did I say I had to go to the Principal Office? THe teacher is no longer putting up with me because I won’t sign.)

As for school values? They can have a mission statement but they can’t control who the student socializes with. Might I add that one of the teachers admitted to me about the less than favorable activities they partake in on their time off. ( drugs) That and that the first teacher any of my kids had was such a detrimental effect on my son that he still hates reading and is afraid.

Um, I think many incidents at school go unreported. I was subjected to the advance of a gym teacher who gave all the girls A+ but none of the boys ever received an A. Plus, I saw my best friend forced down on some boy when the bus driver left the bus. She was afraid to tell anyone. When I approached my counselor and school they blew me off. After all, the girl it happened to was not coming forward. (She was scared. She didn’t trust the authority. Teachers are not friends they are to be respected and you do as they say.) I’ve let many things in school go without telling. No one listens. Plus, What do we teach ALL KIDS? Don’t be a tattle tale. right?
It is bad to tattle.
The tattler is looked down upon.

It is NOT free. School education that is. I send my child to school with new pencils and paper and sanitizer and ….the list is endless. Throught the year the teachers even feel free to ask for MORE! Just Monday I was told I should send bottle water in because fountain breaks are not allowed. I told them they would soon see a doctor note!
If I educated my child at home I could freely use the internet. Books I already own and most of them I have received free. I have free days to take advantage of at zoos and 100’s of other educational places.
I find pencils and pens on the ground all the time. Yes, I pick them up. The school doesn’t even pick up the ones I see on the school grounds. Instead I see the janitor cleaning up the grounds.
In fact, freecycle.org is a great resource to help any home schooler.
Free?
It can be cheaper to home school. write your own curriculum

Plus, As I’ve observed of the home school kids I know. They don’t waste all their day on studies. It seems to take them a couple hours compared to my kids at school from 8:30 AM to 3:00 PM. Plus, My kids waste more of their day on travel to and from school and our route is within a few blocks of the school.

I have my reasons for sending my kids to school.

But, If I had a pro/con sheet? I bet the pros could win.

Now as for you being smarter than most teachers. I bet it holds true in the US. It holds true because we are desperate for underpaid teachers.