56 Responses to “A question for home schoolers”  

1. 1 Lynn Jun 20th, 2007 at 11:38 am

   LOL. Now you’re making fun of our Badge???

   I can’t speak for others but I have The Badge on my site because it’s a easy reminder that not all homeschoolers (definition of which is yet to be determined) are teaching 6-day “creation science.”

   Ammunition? Flak vests? Mortars? Just wanted to drop by and get out early before the bloodshed begins. Uh, have fun?

2. 2 Greg Jun 20th, 2007 at 11:45 am

   Lynn: Go! Flee while you have a chance! Fly like the wind!

   This is not your fight! (See you on your blog.)

3. 3 Tom Jun 20th, 2007 at 12:26 pm

   “To be is to do.” –Socrates
   “To do is to be.” –Jean-Paul Sartre
   “Do be do be do.” –Frank Sinatra
   “Rooby, rooby roo!” –Scooby-Doo

4. 4 andy Jun 20th, 2007 at 2:37 pm

   hi,
   saw some really nice content on your blog and would like to comment that you
   are a very good blogger….why dont you join
   http://www.bloggingtofame.com
   has some cool stuff for good bloggers…..i had a personal nice exp
   and looking at your blogging abilities i would like you to chk this oneout

   regards:-
   andy
   dashingdude2310@gmail.com

5. 5 Crimson Wife Jun 20th, 2007 at 2:53 pm

   Homeschoolers are families consisting of homeschooling parents and homeschooled kids (sometimes also referred to as home-educated kids or HEK’s). These children grow up to be homeschool graduates. Their parents are then former homeschoolers.

   My take on the whole “Evolved Homeschooling” thing is that implies a point-of-view that goes far beyond simply rejecting Biblical Creationism and acceptance of evolution as a mechanism. Perhaps I’m wrong about that, but that’s definitely been the tone of those blogs I’ve read displaying the badge. They are certainly entitled to hold that worldview, but it’s not one I personally share. I wonder if there’s a “Faith & Reason are Complementary” badge out there…

6. 6 cmf Jun 20th, 2007 at 4:50 pm

   “Mollie looks at you with her eyebrows knit”
   Wow, eyebrow knitting!! You do know those *blankers* don’t you?

   Further proof that *blanking* your kids at home in the *blank* environment gives them special talents and skills that ordinary kids don’t have. Now I see why they are so hesitant to discuss the verb tense of *blanking* kids in the *blank* environment.

   ” home schoolers can tell me to be quiet and that I need to either toe the line (believe and express their own very narrow views) or that I am the enemy.”

   I don’t see it Greg, I think you are sounding like you have lost it here….I mean don’t you see the freedom of limiting discusion to narrowly tailored tightly controlled dialogues that avoid scrutiny or oversight: dialogues lobbed into cyberspace sometime after noon when the homeschooler wakes and starts their blog up, meanwhile telling the kids ‘ make your own breakfast’, and yakking about the freedom of the*blanked* kid?

7. 7 Greg Jun 20th, 2007 at 5:22 pm

   Lynne and CW: What is your take on the “We STand for Homeschooling” thing:

   http://westandforhomeschooling.org/res/index.php

   (Hey, you other guys can answer too, but I’m asking the actual homeschoolers!)

8. 8 Marcy Muser Jun 20th, 2007 at 7:10 pm

   Greg,

   I don’t understand the problem here. Is there something wrong with not having a lot of words? The reason there are fewer words in homeschooling is that it is in fact a far more natural process than public schooling. The truth is that there are plenty of words in homeschooling, and I don’t have to go into detail to describe what they mean. Here is the homeschool model as I see it:

   The Family

   The Home

   The Parents

   Child (who learns from parents)
   Child
   Child
   Etc.

   Homeschooling parents are just that - parents, who happen to believe that homeschooling is the best way to educate their children. We don’t feel the need for an additional system to come alongside us to teach our children; and we DO feel that homeschooling is just a natural part of life. I taught my children to walk, and talk, and eat, and dress, and clean up after themselves, and use the bathroom - and I taught them to read, and write, and add, and respect other cultures, and understand the scientific method . . . . Homeschooling is a natural part of what I began doing the day I brought my first daughter home from the hospital, and what I will continue doing for the rest of my children’s lives - being their parent.

   In answer to your question, I would simply say that a homeschooler is a member of a family that believes education rightfully belongs in the family. Because there are so many different homeschoolers, even that basic definition may meet with disagreement, but I think most homeschooling families would agree with that.

   As to the “We Stand for Homeschooling” movement, I know there are many who feel that way. It’s my personal belief that that’s a mistake. Any family who takes any steps closer to bringing education into the family, in my opinion, ought to be commended, not criticized. I understand why legal advocacy groups might not be able to represent those legally enrolled full-time in the public schools, because those students are under the authority of the school system. However, those parents are far more involved in their children’s education than the ones who simply send their kids off every day. If they don’t feel they can provide what their kids need on their own, then they should get help - but it’s better for the kids to have the one-on-one coaching and involvement of their parents than to sit in a classroom with 30 other kids and with a teacher who may or may not really care about them.

   I don’t choose to enroll my kids full-time in a public school alternative program; we have found an excellent one-day-a-week program that encourages our kids and gives them a chance to develop consistent friendships with others like them, while still allowing me to decide what and how they learn. I think that’s healthy. Defining out of “homeschooling” any family who chooses any level of involvement in a public school reduces our strength and hurts our cause. The more responsible families are for the education of their children, the more likely the children are to get a good education, and the healthier and happier they are likely to be, both as children and as adults.

9. 9 Furia Fubar Jun 21st, 2007 at 12:21 am

   When I was a customer service rep working for the catalog house that had American Bible Society as it’s major client, the folks that called up that were homeschooling their kids were easily the most paranoid, rigid, intolerant bunch I could imagine. In fact that whole customer base was a little whacked. But the homeschoolers (parents) of the homeschooler (kids) were just completely unable to function nicely in society and play well with others. And you’re right; there’s not a concrete discrete vocabulary available. It’s all very slippery, like a fish.

10. 10 sam Jun 21st, 2007 at 12:34 am

    This may be the single most ridiculous attempt to damn homeschoolers that I have ever suffered through. I can make no sense of your current argument, and you now come across as if you are a beached whale wondering where the hell the water went.

    We can pretend that your original questions were pertinent, but as homeschoolers, we’ve answered all your questions from a number of sources, not least ourselves. We’ve answered your questions, and when we keep being right, you change the questions. You are determined to find some crack you can pick at enough to eventually burst the damn and show us your light of reason. You have no light, and you have no reason.

    I’m not quite sure what your problem is with homeschoolers/homeschooling. I can’t imagine you love and care for our kids so much that you are spending this much time flailing about for a shred of something you can call an argument. You must really believe that we suck as parents and as the educators of our children.

    Do you really think so poorly of us? Does the truth of our arguments and the proof of thousands of happy and intelligent homeschooled children mean nothing? Is it that we succeed, and that grates on your married-to-the-system nerves?

    Be honest, Greg. Instead of your crazy interpretations and blind reaching for some shred of something, why don’t you tell us your real problem. Why such an inane and unwelcome anti homeschooling agenda? What’s your real motivation?

11. 11 Crimson Wife Jun 21st, 2007 at 2:34 am

    As for the “We Stand For Homeschooling” bit, I definitely share a lot of their concerns about virtual charter schools. However, while I would not personally enroll my children in such a program, I don’t have a problem with families who do enroll their kids calling themselves “homeschoolers”. There are at least 2 families in my local support group who are doing this. If their kids are being taught at home rather than in a bricks-and-mortar school, and they consider themselves to be homeschoolers, then who am I to say they’re not?

    I’m a big believer in parental autonomy to choose whatever materials they wish to educate their own children. I wouldn’t personally use a charter or some fundamentalist program like Bob Jones, but I support the right of other families to do so if they want. It’s their kids and therefore their business.

12. 12 Daryl Cobranchi Jun 21st, 2007 at 5:26 am

    Assuming your questions are legitimate (a huge assumption, I know) many people use the appellation “homeschooler” for both the parents and the kids. To avoid confusion I usually write “home educator” for the parents and “home educated kid” (aka HEK).

    In speaking, we just say we’re “homeschoolers.”

    But I have to agree with Sam. our anti-home education screeds have rapidly gone downhill and are now approaching the tin-foil hat level.

    Therapy can do wonders in treating OCD.

13. 13 Dawn Jun 21st, 2007 at 10:35 am

    What I mean by calling myself a homeschooler is that my kids aren’t in public or private schools. That’s pretty much it. It’s useful for telling people what we don’t do but not very useful for telling that what we DO do. That’s why we’ve got all kind of labels within the homeschooling community to better describe what it is we are doing…unschooling, school-at-home, eclectic, crazy-ass fundies…

    Any attempt to define homeschooler further or lay claim to the exclusive use of that label seems a little funny to me.

14. 14 Rolfe Jun 21st, 2007 at 11:03 am

    Sorry, but you’ll have to decide for yourself whether you trust me. I hope that you don’t, because I don’t really trust myself on most issues.

    When we are actually “homeschooling”, we just use our names to say who is who and it works pretty well. So I’m with Marcy on that. But I agree that it is difficult to speak precisely when the key word has more than one meaning. I think Daryl’s proposal looks fine. Maybe throw in “home education advocates” too.

    Re: the we stand for homeschooling stuff, I don’t want any public funding from my endeavor, but if those programs work for someone, then why stop it? I think it’s kind of funny when “libertarians” try to tell people what to do. Sad, but funny.

    As far as the battle goes, what is the fight for? I don’t know which side to line up with…

15. 15 Greg Jun 21st, 2007 at 12:10 pm

    Rolfe: Why would you not want any public funding? Are you strict on this?

    The battle: That was tongue and cheek. I’m being cynical about the language we’ve all been using. It links to the idea that i’m getting at overall with this post … how labels and symbols … everything from words like “homeschooling” vs. “unschooling” to concepts like the “we stand for” people getting mad when someone uses the word “homeschooling” for something they don’t approve of, to things like the Evolved Homeschooler badge. (By the way I find it interesting that in some comment, somewhere … maybe on your site but I don’t remember … somebody got mad that I “co-opted” the evolved homeschooling badge. Actually, I simply threw it up in the post because I mention it later and thought that would be informative!)

    I think that it is in this world of labels and symbols that there is some structure to the “discussion” and there are some badly broken parts to that. For instance, I’d like to know how it can come about that someone can be vigorously and broadly labeled, in very negative terms as “anti-homeschooling” (me) who a) was homeschooled, b) supports the idea of homeschooling and c) has a lot of problems with the public education system!

    Perhaps my own rhetoric, symbology, and labels do not conform to those expected or demanded by a subgroup of homeschoolers. It’s a little like when I drive around up north in my supposedly foreign car and get dirty looks from guys driving fords and chevys. My car is 100% Made in America and fewer men and women are dying to fill my gas tank (I get good mileage) than theirs, yet my symbols are not in accord with their demands.

    Sam: I’d be interested to know in what way you feel that this post is damning homeschoolers, other than my tongue in cheek “battle cry” bit… which is me poking fun at a few of my good buddies over at Cooking Up a Snook and such foxholes…. If that is what concerns you then loosen your collar and take a deep breadth. I am not the bogeyman. Well, maybe I’m not he bogyman.

16. 16 Rolfe Jun 21st, 2007 at 1:29 pm

    I should say I’m not asking for public funding. It’s pretty hard to go through life without getting some sort of public funding.

    I don’t put badges on my website because I don’t know what the symbol means to other people yet, even when it means something to me. Symbols are interesting and ambiguous ones can lead to all sorts of good fun, but I like to know what fun I’m having. If your goal is just to undefine some terms that don’t mean as much as some people think, then I’m all for it. But I don’t think fighting is very good for my soul, so I’ll run for cover now.

17. 17 Greg Jun 21st, 2007 at 1:40 pm

    Rolfe: Right, no fighting, good idea.

    I completely agree with what you say about symbols. They are entirely what they mean, not what you mean them to mean!

    So if there was a bill that required that 8% of the state’s education budget be made available for homeschoolers (as grants they could apply for, or something along those lines) would that be a good thing or a bad thing? Obviously this would depend on how the grants were evaluated, but say this was to be designed by the homeschooling community rather than DOE staff or legislative dictum.

18. 18 Marcy Muser Jun 21st, 2007 at 2:00 pm

    Greg,

    I can’t answer the question of public funding for Rolfe, but I can for myself. I don’t want public funding, because public in this sense means government. Government funding = government control - there are always strings attached. The biggest problem most of the “We Stand for Homeschooling” crowd has with public funding is that when parents agree to participate in government-funded education, they lose a significant amount of control over what their kids learn.

    If those families who teach their kids at home believe “homeschooling” means “the parent is entirely responsible and in control of every ounce of the children’s education,” I can see why they don’t want to allow anyone who accepts government funding into their definition. I happen to disagree with that definition, though - as I said earlier, I think “homeschooling” means our family believes education rightfully belongs in the family. That gives a lot more “wiggle room” to include a large number of families who teach their children at home, whether the parents entirely control everything the children learn or not.

    Taken to the extreme, it seems to me the control issue could bring a parent to the point of refusing to use any curricular material at all, teaching only what’s in their own head. From that point, there’s an education spectrum that stretches all the way to government control of everything the person learns - “cradle-to-grave” government education. The “less government control” end of the spectrum is where all homeschoolers find themselves, although they fall in dozens of spots along that spectrum.

    It seems to me the reason we see such controversy about this issue is that many homeschooling families perceive the education spectrum as a “slippery slope” - “if you give the government an inch, it will take a mile, so we must keep them completely out of our children’s education.” I don’t see it that way. When I considered involvement in a government-funded program, one of the most serious questions I asked about it was how much control I would maintain. I’m not willing to give up control of my child’s education for any amount of money, because I believe it’s my responsibility. But as long as I maintain the control, I’m willing to take back a small amount of my tax money if it will benefit my children. Believe me, though, if the government attempts to assert control of my kids and their education, I’ll be out of that program in a heartbeat; I remain aware that there is that possibility, and because of that I refuse to become dependent on the program.

    Wow, and I meant to write a SHORT comment! Sorry!

19. 19 Rolfe Jun 21st, 2007 at 3:03 pm

    OK, you’re roping me in here. That is a good question about budgets. My knee-jerk reaction: it would be bad. If the government is going to tax us, they should spend the money responsibly. It would be easier to be responsible with the money inside the public school system (and apparently that isn’t always so easy). Could it be done well? Perhaps. The devil is in the details.

    I also think that rules like “8% of the budget must be spent on such-and-such” are almost always a bad idea even when the intent is good. If you have a good program that should be funded, you should try to respond to the demand for the program. Even if 8% were a good number this year, it might not be good next year. Flexibility is important.

    If I were to design some sort of state help for home educated kids, I’d rather see centers with open laboratories, lectures, and discussion groups that all kids can participate in. It wouldn’t just be for enrolled kids, or just for kids in the school district. It is a half-baked thought, but I think something like this could be done much more responsibly than grants to who-knows-what.

20. 20 Greg Jun 21st, 2007 at 3:13 pm

    I agree that the devil would be in the details. One could argue that money spent in modicum by families would be spent very effectively. In other words, anybody who had a kid in home school instead of public school simply gets a check, if they ask for it, providing a simple paragraph about what it will be spent on. The paragraph is not reviewed, but the collection of paragraphs is assembled and made available (anonymously) to review the program and to demonstrate that it is being effective. Thus, the only “government control” is when the government cuts the program off because everybody used the money for popcorn at the movies (which, I’m not saying would be misspent … but it would be strange if everybody did it).

    The 8% bit has to happen, I think. Or a set number of dollars. There has to be a way to tell the people who cut the checks what to do, and I doubt there is some actual number that we know of that would be “the” numbers. But you are right, flexibility would be ideal.

    The state center with open labs: We tried that one, and got close. My friend and colleague Rusty had this on her list of things to accomplish while running a unit at the University of Minnesota designed to support teacher training. It was a great program. The labs were not intended specifically for homeschoolers, but would certainly not have excluded them.

    There are some facilities here at The U that are available, such as the Open Heart Lab.

    But yes, I see your point about responsible spending, which can be done with proper oversight and management within the system.

    My model for this sort of thing is to get everybody excited, figure it out, fund it, then after a few years ax the program and require that it be rethought. If the rethought program is identical to the original program, then fine, no problem. But if you just let the program keep going, it will eventually become inefficient, ineffective, or be eaten up by some other unit of whatever the host is and used for something else. I call it Dynamic Optimization of Bureaucracy.

21. 21 Rolfe Jun 21st, 2007 at 4:33 pm

    You may be right about the 8% thing. I don’t have an alternative. But the program you described seems like it would introduce quite a moral hazard. Parents would have a financial incentive to pull their kids from school, even when they don’t really want to teach them at home. This incentive would be strongest for the poorest parents, making it worse. As much as people criticize the “day-care” aspects of schools today, at least it gives parents a financial incentive to educate their kids. Even if a lot of parents do great things with the money, I don’t like the risks. I have no idea what kind of oversight would let you determine whether

    That is interesting that you had some experience with the open labs. Of course something like that should be open to everyone. Public libraries are already a great step in that direction, my family uses them all of the time. Maybe they could be a place to experiment.

    Dynamic Optimization of Bureaucracy. I like that idea. You have to make sure that the inefficiencies of axing and redefining programs aren’t greater than the inefficiencies you are trying to avoid. But I’m intrigued at the approach.

    I agree with much of what Marcy has to say. The government can’t really control you if the program is voluntary. If the parents can’t think for themselves to make these decisions, then maybe the government does need to think for them. If they make the program so good that thinking parents can’t refuse, then we have a delightful problem.

22. 22 Rolfe Jun 21st, 2007 at 4:42 pm

    Sorry, I had some technical difficulties there. At the end of the last paragraph I meant to say “I have no idea what kind of oversight would let you determine whether giving parents that check was harming the child.”

23. 23 Greg Jun 21st, 2007 at 4:54 pm

    I would think that if parents are going to harm their children, it would no make much difference if they had a few hundred bucks a couple of times a year. (To buy ammo? Sharp instruments?)

24. 24 Greg Jun 21st, 2007 at 5:58 pm

    Rolfe: I agree with you. But I was thinking more like 300 bucks a semester for supplies or to cover “field trip” (local/regional travel) costs. Like to go to the big city for a couple of days to see the museums and stuff, or to buy some needed computer upgrades, etc.

    Regarding your comments on Marcy’s comments:

    I know you are not explicitly saying this, but implicit or inferable from your comment is that there is a two way correlation between the inability for some parents to “make the decisions” (about education, etc.) and putting kids in schools. Again, I doubt you are saying this but this is not far from what I often hear from many home schoolers: That parents who put their kids in public school are somehow inadequate parents. Do you also see a certain amount of that rhetoric in the discussion?

25. 25 Rolfe Jun 21st, 2007 at 6:31 pm

    OK, I don’t think many people would withdraw their kids from school for $300. I still think I’d rather see the money go to public resources, but haven’t thought about it enough.

    I was being a little flippant with my comment about people needing the government to think for them. I was just talking about the people who think that if the government offers them a check, they have to take it (and mourn their loss of liberty). Sometimes I think they are trying to cloak a complaint about “high taxes” in the garb of a fight for liberty. My jab was really a reductio ad absurdum: if they are right about the program taking away their freedom, it must be because they are not capable of saying no to the program. If they cannot say no to a voluntary program, then maybe they aren’t very clear thinkers and need some help. Not a tight argument, I know.

    With that said, checks with strings attached can tie down the poor and leave the rich free. That does concern me.

    I have seen a bit of the “homeschoolers are better parents” rhetoric. I’ll just say it’s ridiculous.

26. 26 Crimson Wife Jun 21st, 2007 at 8:57 pm

    I can’t speak for any other homeschoolers, but the two main reasons why we would not accept government money (I believe our local charter offers something like $1700 per year) are (1) standardized testing and (2) restrictions on which materials may be used even if we pay for them out-of-pocket. We could live with #1 if we were allowed to choose a short test such as the CAT-E and to test above grade level in order to get some meaningful information out of the experience. #2 is the deal-breaker for us. Sure, the money would be nice but it’s not worth the strings attached!

27. 27 Lynn Jun 21st, 2007 at 9:25 pm

    Backing up a bit to labels: I agree that the term “homeschooler” is too vague, but Dawn makes a good point that, within homeschooling, there are a myriad of terms, maybe even too many; school-at-home, literature-based, eclectic, Charlotte Mason, Thomas Jefferson, unschooling, deschooling. Greg, wasn’t it you that said you’d be interested in homeschooling if it weren’t for practical concerns, and someone suggested “afterschooling” instead? And, of course, there’s now talk of “pre-schooling” (at home). I’m new to the term, HEKs, but I kinda like it as I just discovered Hillbillian roots in our family and think it could lots of fun for my daughter to be a HICK HEK… As for myself, I talk a lot about “christian fundamentalist extremists” on my blog, so I’m happy to learn there’s an abbreviated version; “crazy-ass fundies.” (Thanks Dawn!)

    Just a quick example bridging the two topics of labeling and public-funded homeschooling: Two stories about charter-schooled kids were in the news recently; one involved rampant cheating found on standardized tests; the other, about a new spelling bee champion. “Now I’m not accusing anyone of anything…,” (friendly smile) but, strangely, some referred to the Spelling Bee Champ as a “homeschooler,” and the cheaters as “government-funded charter school students.” So, I say we milk the ambiguity and stop all work on clarifying terms instantly.

    While The We Stand For Homeschooling people worry about the cheaters (giving homeschoolers a bad name), my impression is that they’re primarily concerned about blurring the line between homeschoolers who aren’t regulated (themselves) and those who are. Many believe that they are at risk when lumped together with those also using the same label. They fear being drawn into the larger public school system against their will as a consequence of this muddying of terms.

    In my small corner of the world, these public-funded programs are pretty popular. Generally, you meet once a month with a teacher and show work samples. Some programs are pretty liberal in terms of requirements, others are pretty restrictive and inflexible. All kids are required to do testing. As for perks? The most popular programs provide free access to group classes, book clubs, science and computer labs, field trips, social events, a special library (for books, curriculum, manipulatives, science supplies). Some programs will reimburse you for internet access - or special educational classes or lessons. The critics worry about these things as bribes to lure homeschoolers back into the system. The “slippery slope” argument that Marcy mentioned, along with a lot of other great points. Lots of parents seem to think that they’ll just leave if the programs become too restrictive and, in the meantime, they’re “already paying taxes…” There’s also a lot of movement into and out of these programs for various reasons.

    By the way, Greg, I happened to be reading one of your earlier posts (on a related topic) in which you referred to… our badge. You said it was, “very cool.” Of course, now I’m thinking that you secretly covet our badge and make fun of it only to mask your disappointment at not having one of your own. You know, Dawn is very nice and would probably give you one if you asked.

    And, I’m not complaining, mind you, but, tin-foil hats? That’s it? Where are promised rivers of blood and flying body parts? What kind of war are you throwing here anyway?

28. 28 cmf Jun 22nd, 2007 at 1:05 am

    I am still knitting eyebrows .

29. 29 cmf Jun 22nd, 2007 at 1:07 am

    and slashing, and burning…..more burning…and knitting. Where are all of those fun authoritarians? Where have all the authoritarians gone?? Nance, JJ….NAAaannCCCeee…JJjjjJJJJJjjjjjjj??

30. 30 Penny Jun 22nd, 2007 at 9:08 am

    And what word defines Greg Laden’s relationship to homeschooling, I wonder? Is this part of your anthropology research? Or what? Please excuse me for not being up to speed, I’ve been too busy ‘blanking’ with my kid.

31. 31 Marcy Muser Jun 22nd, 2007 at 10:31 am

    CW: I agree 100% with your reasoning about avoiding your government-funded program. Under no circumstances would I take government money if it restricted the materials I could use in my home to educate my children. The program I’m involved in offers one-day-a-week classes with other homeschooled kids; they also allow us to order “non-sectarian” curriculum at no charge, but there is not requirement that we order anything at all and no restriction on what we do or don’t use. They offer testing but don’t require us to use that service. I’m willing to accept government money under those terms.

    Lynn: I agree that the big concern is the blurring of lines between charter-school students and those who control all of their children’s education. That concerns me, too; too many people will think that if those charter-school “homeschoolers” cheat on their standardized tests, then all homeschoolers must need additional regulations so that they don’t cheat. We’ve seen this kind of generalization happen before with those who claim to be homeschoolers so they don’t have to deal with the school system - every example seems to lead to new attempts at government regulation. At the same time, I get very frustrated with those who can’t distinguish between restrictive and helpful programs. I’ve been shunned by some homeschoolers who think that by enrolling my children in this very non-restrictive, positive, part-time program, I’ve “betrayed the cause.” I’m not homeschooling so I can have complete control over my children; I’m homeschooling because a) I believe education belongs in the family; and b) I believe it’s the best option for my children academically, socially, emotionally, and spiritually. Neither of those options are excluded by the program I’m involved in.

    And I agree, with those parents who feel they will leave if the program becomes too restrictive. Some homeschoolers doubt whether this will really happen; I’ve already left the school system, chosen to stay at home with my kids rather than work, and spent literally thousands of dollars in curriculum. I have no hesitation in dropping the program in an instant if they begin to exert control over what I’m doing at home, or if the program in any way becomes intrusive.

32. 32 Greg Jun 22nd, 2007 at 10:34 am

    Penny,

    Are you asking me seriously?

    I have a long time interest in science education and K-12 education in general, and homeschooling is part of that larger world.

    Chrimson: When you say restrictions on materials, are you talking about curriculum materials? Topical? What would be an example of what one couldn’t do if one took the money?

    It seems reasonable for the Gov to ask for testing in connection with giving out what is kind of a large amount of money, but It totally agree with you on why that would be a bother (it is not THAT much money!) Personally, I think the testing monster needs to be tamed and domesticated. Testing should not be what drives the system and it should not be something that demands so much feeding (sacrifice, rally). Rather, testing should be a tool that is useful and flexible. One problem is that there is not a testing industry, so once again, the Free Market (Libertarians take special note here!) has taken over the levers controlling this particular beast.

    Lynne: Thanks for all those comments and all that info.

    In this sort of situation, I would react by turning the situation on it’s head. Instead of organized ed offering, for whatever motive, perks and requirements in some combination to homeschoolers, the opposite should be done (this is from a homeschooling perspective). The traditional educators should be chomping at the bit to get involved in homeschooling.

    Examples:

    1) Internet-organized efforts to fund and manage and coordinate small group out-of-the-home events, such as spending a week working in a science lab at the U, or for more rural areas, getting on a minibus and spending a week in the big city seeing a couple of plays, visiting a couple of museums, etc. etc. And so on.

    2) Some kind of home-context attack on a particular problem or topic that uses some really well developed pedagogy and appropriate distributed technology etc. .. this is other than what could normally be done in the homeschool setting because of a materials or cost problem, so that is the organized part of it: Getting what is needed into the home.

    Traditional ed kids would benefit for joining up now and then with these efforts. Like an exchange school system. Homeschoolers, take in a public schooler for a day or two!!!

    Lynn, on the badge, yes, I secretly covet it! Of course! But there is more. For one thing, there is a merry band of home schoolers who loathe me so completely that I find it fascinating, all of whom are badged evolved homeschoolers. I find this interesting because my interest (to go back to the beginning of this comment) is mainly about teaching evolution vs. creationism in general (all contexts, K-grad school-and-beyond) So why doesn’t this group of the “evolved homeschoolers” and I get along? Interesting question, no easy answer.

    Regardless, the fact is that as far as I can tell there are about 8 or 9 people wearing this badg (maybe a few more) and several (about 6?) actively fear and loath your’s truly, and in so doing have demonstrated a number of traits (intolerance, dishonesty, a mean spirit, and dare I say it … a lack of intelligence … in various degrees not evenly distributed across the group). This is a group I don’t want to be a member of. When I see that badge on someone’s site now, I wonder about them. I was going to put this fish on my site and link it to the master ship site, but never got around to it, then realized that I’m glad I didn’t do it.

    Also, you know the Darwin Fish is trademarked. There may be legal issues here. Whoever created the Evolved Homeschooler badge may be asking for trouble.

    Besides, I’m working on a Pastafarian Homeschooler Badge….

33. 33 Greg Jun 22nd, 2007 at 10:39 am

    Marcy: You bring up an interesting point: From the vantage of homeschooling, you have the ability to enter or withdraw from various programs fairly easily.

34. 34 Dawn Jun 22nd, 2007 at 3:30 pm

    //Also, you know the Darwin Fish is trademarked. There may be legal issues here. Whoever created the Evolved Homeschooler badge may be asking for trouble.//

    That would be me. I’ll wait until I get a threatening letter. For now I’m content that my parody of the original design seems to fit with what the initial creators intended and wanted.

    //So why doesn’t this group of the “evolved homeschoolers” and I get along?//

    Because you and they aren’t bothering to get along. For your part you seemed to delight in push-button posts there for a bit with homeschool abuse stories. You think that’s really going to help build bridges?

    Frankly, I don’t care about the tiff. I like and respect your blog. I like and respect the blogs of JJ, COD and Doc. Why don’t we just get on with talking about education instead of each other?

35. 35 cmf Jun 22nd, 2007 at 4:12 pm

    “you seemed to delight in push-button posts there for a bit with homeschool abuse stories.”
    Hmmm…where is my broom? Oh, yeah, I left it with those pagans…..but at least I still have my rug to kick the issue under.

36. 36 Daryl Cobranchi Jun 22nd, 2007 at 5:28 pm

    So why doesn’t this group of the “evolved homeschoolers” and I get along? Interesting question, no easy answer…

    Regardless, the fact is that as far as I can tell there are about 8 or 9 people wearing this badg (maybe a few more) and several (about 6?) actively fear and loath your’s truly, and in so doing have demonstrated a number of traits (intolerance, dishonesty, a mean spirit, and dare I say it … a lack of intelligence … in various degrees not evenly distributed across the group). This is a group I don’t want to be a member of.

    Uninteresting question easily answered. You regularly put up negatively-slanted posts while not bothering to educate yourself about that which you post. Sam nailed you early in this thread. Fear you? Hardly. Loathe you? Well, you’ve earned it.

37. 37 cmf Jun 22nd, 2007 at 5:37 pm

    I remember from my days as a young actor, one of the primary criticisms of a young actor is emotional immaturity, which shows itself when the young actor chooses the emotions of 1) anger 2) loathing 3) obvious and overplayed sadness on stage.
    These are the easiest and most nauseating emotions to watch on a live stage. I wonder if this easy anger and loathing has a correlation?

38. 38 Dawn Jun 22nd, 2007 at 5:44 pm

    //In this sort of situation, I would react by turning the situation on it’s head. Instead of organized ed offering, for whatever motive, perks and requirements in some combination to homeschoolers, the opposite should be done (this is from a homeschooling perspective). The traditional educators should be chomping at the bit to get involved in homeschooling.//

    I think that’s an exciting idea. Personally, I hope the lasting effect of homeschooling and other alternatives to the traditional model of education is that people start seeing education as something that’s flexible, adaptable, individual and self-directed. That it’s something the individual can build themselves and not a package they have to buy into. Most of all make it about choices. Education isn’t about that these days…at least not for the first 13 years of most kids’ lives.

39. 39 Greg Jun 22nd, 2007 at 7:09 pm

    Dawn:

    I don’t know. The original Darwin Fish was a parody of the Jesus Fish. If you do a parody of the Darwin Fish, does that cancel out the original parody, making your product a trademark violation? I don’t know….

    Me? Push buttons?

    Daryl: I’m made of rubber, you’re made of glue. Everything you say bounces off of me and sticks on you.

    Dawn: Exactly. You might be interested to know that my very first entry in this weblog was inspired by Ivan Illich:

    http://gregladen.com/wordpress/?p=30

40. 40 Dawn Jun 22nd, 2007 at 8:11 pm

    //Me? Push buttons?//

    

    And thanks for the link to that entry.

41. 41 Penny Jun 22nd, 2007 at 8:49 pm

    By the way, my last question to you was serious. I rather think your interest in homeschooling is longer-standing than my activity in it. You seem very involved, for an interested citizen. Oh well, I couldn’t sleep, so I’ve come back with a response to your post. Curse my interest in words.

    It seems to me that words get invented not to cover every single thing that exists, but to make useful distinctions and comparisons. For biological reasons nobody is seriously confused about the distinction between the child homeschooler and the parent homeschooler, so the lack of separate terms isn’t a problem. From context, I’ve never been in any doubt as to whether a speaker meant the parent, the children or both. Almost everyone in the world is confused about the distinction between an identity label and a term that applies to something they spend or spent much of their life doing, I hardly think the problem is limited to ‘retired homeschoolers’, if you like, whose children have grown up and left home.

    In schools, children have a label, ’student’, and adults another, ‘teacher’. I would suspect that this doesn’t exist only or primarily to define the roles and hierarchies of teacher and student with respect to each other, as your diagram suggests. It also excludes other roles that either child or adult might have outside the school context. And it exists to allow discrimination in a whole bunch of other areas. Hierarchy amongst adults is an important one: teacher/principal, teacher/professor, teacher/assistant, teacher/inspector. The discrimination between teacher/parent roles where school is involved seems to be something of a battleground. Names also convey status or lack of it, which I suppose is why yesterday’s pupils have been promoted to students. A student isn’t, or didn’t used to be ‘one who is taught’, but ‘one who studies’, possibly under guidance. So the teacher/student dyad is a bit of an odd one anyway.

    What you are looking for, I suspect, isn’t a term that allows you to discriminate between homeschooling parents and children, but one that allows you to compare them to teachers and students respectively, without any of their other roles getting inconveniently tangled up in the comparison. Then of course, you might also need a special term to compare homeschooling parents to parents with children at school. From the point of view of homeschoolers, I can imagine that this might seem artificial and pointless, if it doesn’t represent a comparison they are interested in making.

    I recently discovered that in British English, I am (currently) a home educator. I happen to be a mother to the same child, but historically I would quite probably have been a governess or tutor. Children don’t seem to get a special label (home educatee?, no way!), I have a feeling that the concept of learner is included in the word child. Schoolchild defines children who go to a particular place each day, and traditionally differentiated them from the large proportion of children who didn’t. It’s an interesting difference in labelling systems.

42. 42 Greg Jun 22nd, 2007 at 11:37 pm

    Thanks for those comments. One think I think interesting is that in recent history (mid 20th cen) the word “schooling” was linked to the bad side of education. Schooling was an activity of the state designed to produce appropriately designed cogs for the military industrial complex, etc. If I were to invent what is now called “home schooling” back in the 1960s or 1970s, the word “schooling” would be the last thing I would use.

    So, the term “home educator” is very interesting.

    Another thing I’m thinking about, and getting at, is that to me the term “home schooling” contrasts with “schooling.” Home schooling as a term and a practice seem to be set up in opposition to schooling.

    If you set something up in opposition to something else, it may become forever entangled by and defined by that thing. That is powerful symbology, and not wise.

43. 43 Crimson Wife Jun 22nd, 2007 at 11:53 pm

    Under California state law, students enrolled in charter school programs cannot use any religious materials in their schoolwork even if the parents pay for it out of pocket. Apparently, doing so would be considered government financing of a religious school and therefore a violation of the separation of church & state. I use mostly secular materials (completely secular for science & math) but I do teach Religion as a subject and incorporate some religious materials into Language Arts, History, Art, Music, and eventually Latin. For example, my daughter practices her penmanship by copying Bible verses. You are certainly entitled to your own opinion about it, but it’s my prerogative and I’m not about to give that up for a modest amount of government money.

    Some families get around this restriction by going “on” and “off” the school clock but I object to how this segregation IMHO creates a false opposition between Reason and Faith. I’m not going to call only one part of my children’s education “school” just to satisfy Big Brother.

44. 44 cmf Jun 23rd, 2007 at 12:27 am

    Here is a link that points to the early roots of the public education systemin America, called “The Educational System Was Designed to Keep Us Uneducated and Docile.”

    “….the captains of industry and government explicitly wanted an educational system that would maintain social order by teaching us just enough to get by but not enough so that we could think for ourselves, question the sociopolitical order, or communicate articulately.”
    http://www.thememoryhole.org/edu/school-mission.htm

    and the source “Underground History of American Education”
    http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/

45. 45 Lynn Jun 23rd, 2007 at 1:55 am

    CW: I’m really familiar with the points you’re making because I used to make some of them myself. Ironically, and in practice, I found the opposite to be true. One year, we tried the very popular, county-wide, independent study program run by our local Department of Education. I was surprised to find that the staff seemed comprised mostly of evangelical Christian homeschoolers of grown children. Funny, in filling out the paperwork, I mentioned a Christian homeschooling group of which we were a part for a short time (long story), apparently leading them to assume that I was “one of them.” Consequently, I was taken aside and reassured more than once that the restrictions (that you mention) are really not taken seriously. We’re Christians, too (wink, wink). I don’t know where you are in California, but this has been my experience here in the southern end.

46. 46 Greg Jun 23rd, 2007 at 10:37 am

    CW: I think that provision is pretty reasonable … not a matter of public opinion, but rather, of law. One could argue that covering religion in the equivalent of a “religious class” should not be covered, but if you are “teaching religion” that is probably reasonably disallowed, as opposed to teaching “society and culture” or something along those lines, and covering religions, etc. Here, the constitution is protecting me from having my tax dollars spent promoting a religion.

47. 47 Housewife Jun 24th, 2007 at 1:05 am

    I dunno about all this.

    I’m a housewife but I didn’t marry a house.

    There are quite a few people who homeschool who probably shouldn’t and they’re big loud voices.

    Unfortunately the homeschoolers I’ve run into that are doing a good job (I can count them on ONE hand) are too busy to tell you about Jesus and his magic Dinosaur making wand.

48. 48 cmf Jun 24th, 2007 at 9:44 pm

    Housewife:You are so validating my new hypotheses about some cliques of homeschoolers here when you say
    “There are quite a few people who homeschool who probably shouldn’t and they’re big loud voices.
    I am a layperson, and I never get…….um….*blanked* or *blanked*, or or let my feathers get too ruffled about difering opinions;-)

49. 49 cmf Jun 24th, 2007 at 9:57 pm

    housewife: You are so validating my hypotheses about certain cliques of homeschoolers when you say “There are quite a few people who homeschool who probably shouldn’t and they’re big loud voices.” It is almost as if some of them are more than willing to demonstrate all of the stereotypes about antisociality, paranoia and society fearing that the media is allegedly portraying.

    However, Is a does the church lady live in a church, is the wall flower ever really growing, or the layperson getting laid? And is a bricklayer perverse in some way? Do cattlemen have four legs, and are cowboys always chapped? Does the doorman have hinges, ?!!Oh my! But Greg does have a way with words, and asks great questions;-)

50. 50 Greg Jun 24th, 2007 at 11:55 pm

    I should note that CMF is less repetitive than he/she appears to be. For some reason, and I honestly don’t know why, CMF and Dawn are getting tossed in the moderation que now and then, so what I think you are seeing is attempts at re-posting.

51. 51 Housewife Jun 25th, 2007 at 1:14 am

    “I am a layperson, and I never get…….um….*blanked* or *blanked*”

    Um… that is the saddest thing I’ve ever heard.

    I’m definitely a lay person!

    It’s unfair to pick on the poor homeschoolers though. So many of them are really cool wacky survivalists that are educating their children in bomb shelters.

    Others see that the system simply does not work and they can’t (or won’t) afford private schools (I dig these parents) similarly others have formed networks that function quite like a private school (I also like these folks a lot).

    And then there are the loons who are barely literate, don’t believe in birth control (oooh I wish we could get their DNA to STOP) and boy do they blog.

    Because they’re gonna save the world.

    Amen sister…

    They’re so stupid though that it’s not fair to pick on them. It’s a little like shooting fish in a barrel, only satisfying for the children.

52. 52 Penelope T. RAX Jun 25th, 2007 at 4:15 am

    Dawn: I was just providing substance, and discussion points…and Don’t feel too sorry for ol’ me…I am a silverback;-)Um… that is the saddest thing I’ve ever heard.I’m definitely a lay person!”
    But what do you think of the whole John Taylor Gatto screed? I mean, sure, public schools have large flaws( tho I hate to admit it outright and give that particular Klavern merit). But really, at least so far there is no Koresh, or no MOVE homeschoolers amongst the PS folks….unless you count Columbine, which was led by the son of an FBI agent….

53. 53 Penelope T. RAX Jun 25th, 2007 at 4:17 am

    p.s.
    Unless you count all of the Andrea Yates amd pagan community who still sleep with their mothers;-)

54. 54 Penelope T. RAX Jun 25th, 2007 at 4:27 am

    Mr. Laden:
    p.s.
    Unless you count all of the Andrea Yates and pagan community who still sleep with their mothers;-)
    By the way , Greg, did you notice that JJ has fibnally explicated her inner fantasies?
    She says “Pouty-lipped tarted up Bratz dolls (in swimsuits?) who swallow Doc’s drug and then do that hypersexy diarrhea thing right in your little girl’s lap . . .”
    YUK. Each to their own;-) Her and her “little girl”….how chauvanist and patronizing…I think she is every inch the matriarchal and subtly abusive creature I have read about…YUK…

    http://cockingasnook.wordpress.....is-bunker/

55. 55 Penelope T. RAX Jun 25th, 2007 at 4:31 am

    Greg, are you moderating? Either way, I noticed this story on Yahoo ( which I have noticed you HATE;-)
    I wonder what Ignacius P. Riley would say about this??!!
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200.....insulation

1. 1 Mom Is Teaching » Blog Archive » What is a home schooler? Pingback on Jun 20th, 2007 at 11:06 am

Leave a Reply