Last Thursday, Friday and Saturday my wife and I attended the 26th annual North Carolina Home Education Conference. We currently have four children, the oldest of which will be 7 this year. We have schooled him at home for the last two years and have committed to home educate all our children. The conference this year was as informative and productive as ever and we were able to pick up all our curriculum materials for the year and hear some great presentations along the way. I was able to listen to two talks given by Dr. Brian Ray, who has eight children (7 daughters and one son) and works for the National Home Education Research Institute in Salem, Oregon. His talks were great, in that they allowed me to think all over again the fundamental reasons why my wife and I decided to home educate our children and some of the philosophical issues that are at the crux of any discussion on the education of children in this country. I feel compelled to put these ideas in writing and lay out a rudamentary argument for home education, as well as present some of the challenging positions and get to the heart of the matter.
Very briefly, statistics show that on average home educated students perform above average in comparison with public school students. Research results done by Dr. Ray can be found here (Research Facts on Homeschooling) but some of the statistics that immediately impress are as follows:
The home-educated typically score 15 to 30 percentile points above public-school students on standardized academic achievement tests. (The public school average is the 50th percentile; scores range from 1 to 99.)
Homeschool students score above average on achievement tests regardless of their parents’ level of formal education or their family’s household income.
Home-educated students typically score above average on the SAT and ACT tests that colleges consider for admissions.
(All these above italicized results copied directly from Dr. Ray's site as linked to above. Please visit the link or http://www.nheri.org/ for more content)
Beside just the statistical justification for the effectiveness of home education, there is also a fundamental philosophical thread woven throughout the issue of children's education. Throughout one of Dr. Ray's talks (entitled Academic Elite Angst Over Home Education: Attacking Homeschooling Without Basis) I was struck by the common theme in the myriad quotes that were presented in peer-reviewed papers of those in acedemia who shape education policy. That theme is authority and responsibility. In question form, it would be presented as: "Who is responsible for educating children?" Now this might seem like a simple question, but many different areas of thought are brought in. It is clear from the discussion presented here that those who strongly advocate public education feel that those who have spent their lives at University in the education field, developing curriculum and textbooks, and are directly involved in setting educational standards (or the Academic Elite as Dr. Ray described) have the responsibility to educate children by the authority vested in them by the state. This position begs the questions; Where are the parents of the children in this discussion, and Who gave the state the authority to make the Academic Elite responsible?
Removal of the parents from the decision-making process for their own children's education is a serious mistake in fundamental thinking. It is true that for decades, the feeling has been growing until now the default position by many parents is "I don't have a degree in education, so I don't know how to teach my children," or "I can teach my children how to tie their shoes, but i've got to leave the bookwork to the professionals." That attitude didn't arise overnight. It has become commonplace today, to the point that even before children are born the assumption is they will have to go to someone else for their education. Social issues behind this attitude are many, but again the main problem is that parents do not feel qualified, and attempt to either remove themselves or allow themselves to be removed from a position of responsibility and authority with regard to their children's education. Now, of course the two word question arises, "So what?"
As it turns out, the "So what" question is a critical one. Children are human beings, born to parents. What document, provision, stipulation, law, code or ruling puts the state in charge of those people? Quite simply there is none. There is no document in this country that states that municipal, state or national agencies have the authority or responibility to dictate to parents what they must do with their children (except in cases of neglect or abuse). So-called Academic Elites do not stand on a position of authority, but on one of philosophical force. The underlying position is one of an egalitarianism of ideas and an elitism of people. Put another way, they feel that all ideas are equally true but that one person (or group of people) decide which idea is best and which everyone else should adopt. That position is fundamentally flawed, not only because all ideas are obviously not equally true because the law of non-contradiction holds, but also because we don't live in a nation founded on the principle of might makes right.
What the nation was founded on was a philosophy of an elitism of ideas and an egalitarianism of people. Put another way, one idea is true (namely the Judeo-Christian or Biblical Christian position) and all people are created equal. In his Civil Authority and the Bible, Harold O.J. Brown states the following:
"When we speak of church and state, it is important to recognize that as far as institutions go, the earliest and primary human social institution, or rather social structure, is the family...Examples of simple governmental institutions do exist in the Hebrew Scriptures, but the duties of the individual toward civil government are not spelled out as they are, at least in principle, in the New Testament. Perhaps the explanation is the fact that from the age of the patriarchs to the Exile, authority remained primarily personal and familial. In the early chapters of the Bible, family, society, and congregation are interwoven. Religious leaders are civil leaders: Moses himself is the prime example. Both the family and the church antedate the state."
Not that last line carefully one more time. Both the family and the church antedate the state. The family was established by God before the state, authority for children was given by God to parents for their children, prior to the establishment of institutions. We see clearly from scripture that people and interpersonal relationships preceed institutions, governments and the like. This point is expounded further by Herbert W. Titus in his God's Revelation: Foundation for the Common Law where he states:
"Rightfully understood, Genesis 1:28 along with Genesis 1:26 is a grant of authority, not a conveyance of title...The grant of authority in Genesis 1:28 is not to humankind in general, but to humankind through the family unit...In short, God selected the family as the primary economic unit of society-not the individual, not the state, not the corporation, and not the church. The common law was designed to foster and protect the family, not only through rules protecting private-property ownership and facilitating its voluntary transfer but also through criminal sanctions prohibiting adultery, fornication, sodomy and bigamy. Since the Darwinian revolution, however, this understanding of common law has deteriorated."
The movement of which my family is a part is commonly referred to as homeschooling. Dr. Ray, however turned a phrase that I found much more apt and descriptive of the choice my wife and I have made: Parent-Led, Home-Based Discipleship. We base our position on our children's education on the same foundation as in all other choices in our lives, on the Word of God. God established the family as the primary human institution and we should fight to preserve the family, not promote the removal of parents from making decisions relative to their own children.
Before closing, let me be quick to say that I am not anti-education, anti-public school, or anti-academia. I'm not arguing that education is bad, or that a good parent will choose to prevent their children from receiving an education. I believe we are to love God with all our mind and that parents have to be good stewards in developing the minds of their children and help them become good thinkers. My central point is on what I believe to be the hinge on which the argument swings; namely that the authority and responsibility for children's education belongs to the parents, not to the state. Parents may choose public schools, private schools, parochial schools, charter schools, usage of any available voucher system, homeschool or other.
Sociologically, children function better with the active involvement and support of their family. Research statistics show that homeschool children, on average, perform above average in academic measures. Philosophically an elitism of ideas and an egalitarianism of people is the only tenable and non-contradictory position. Biblically, the family is the primary human institution and Parent-Led, Home-Based Discipleship should always be preserved and supported as parents do their best under God to train up their children in the way they should go.
As a final aside, let me say how proud I am of the state of North Carolina for supporting home education, and the North Carolinians for Home Education organization for their encouragement, support and recognition of home educators in our state.
Very briefly, statistics show that on average home educated students perform above average in comparison with public school students.
ReplyDeleteWell, of course, a child with one on one attention from a parent concerned about education for their child and with the time and wherewithal to be able to home-school that child, of course these children will do better than in classes of 20-50 led by strangers. At least insofar as academics are concerned.
No doubt about it. If either of my children were struggling in public school, I would have taken them out and home-schooled.
But for some of us, there is more than just the individual concern and there's more than just academics that are at stake.
I want my children to be able to know how to deal with folk from a wide range of life. I want them to have chance to work with folk of different races, socioeconomic status, culture, etc. That is part of the education, too.
Also, while we could have home-schooled our children if we had chosen to, not everyone has the wherewithal (educational, financial, emotional) to do so. What shall we do with them?
All in all - for me - I believe public education is well worth it and it has been a good experience for our children (and for their parents and grandparents before them).
Which is not to criticize home-schoolers. I have many friends who have gone that route and there are many legitimate reasons to do so.
I just thought I'd offer the point that it should come as no surprise that home-schoolers do better on average in academics and that we ought not use such stats to denigrate public schools, which serve a marvelous function - despite its real limitations. (And I'm not saying you are denigrating public schools, I should be clear - just making the point because some people do.)
Dan,
ReplyDeleteNice to see you again, it's been awhile.
I'm glad you can see the value in home-based education, however I am utterly confused by your comment. The vast majority of my post was dealing with the issue of authority over decision making for a child's education. I spoke of those in academia that would seek to villify home-based education (along with a link to articles for reference) and seek to eliminate even the possibility of parents ability to home-school their children.
How you read the post with the development of philosophical ideas to specifically address the issue of who has authority to decide how to educate a child, and then picked out one reference to some statistical data (which was provided as a defense for not eliminating home-based education, by the way) to make a defense of public education like public schools are under attack and need defending from some home-schoolers really is beyond me.
My position was to reinforce the notion that parents have the authority to decide how best to educate their children. You choose public school, which you have the authority to do as a parent; this goes to my point, end of story.
Please don't take these comments as anger or lashing out. After all, your ability to choose what to do with your children with regard to their education (for whatever your reasons: social, academic, financial, etc.) simply goes to the point I was trying to make. I'm just stupified really as to how it is you felt the necessity to come to the defense of public schools when they weren't under attack. No answer needed there, I just don't get it.
As a point of discussion, however, and as you have been here before and we have had discussions on several topics before; how do you see your role as a parent relative to your child's education?
You said:
"But for some of us, there is more than just the individual concern and there's more than just academics that are at stake.
I want my children to be able to know how to deal with folk from a wide range of life. I want them to have chance to work with folk of different races, socioeconomic status, culture, etc. That is part of the education, too.
Also, while we could have home-schooled our children if we had chosen to, not everyone has the wherewithal (educational, financial, emotional) to do so. What shall we do with them?"
It would seem by reading your comment that you see yourself functioning as more of a liason for social experience and academic exposure. Is that a fair assessment?
I see myself as the parent, the one responsible for the holistic development (spiritual, educational, societal, moral, etc) of my children. Not primarily a "liaison," (definition: communication for establishing and maintaining mutual understanding and cooperation), but that would be one of the parental roles, as I see it.
ReplyDeleteA liaison for my children and school, a liaison for my children and the community around them, a liaison for my children and their faith community. The "social experience" and "academic exposure" would be part of all that, I suppose.
Do you see the parental role having a liaison component to it, too?
I am also educator, trainer, mentor and role model myself (as scary as that may be for them...).
Also, you said...
My position was to reinforce the notion that parents have the authority to decide how best to educate their children.
I got that, which is why I pointed out that I wasn't suggesting that you were denigrating public schools - just that too often I have seen too many homeschoolers use such stats for the purpose of denigrating public schools.
I agree with your point of parents having the authority over how they raise their children.
Dan,
ReplyDeleteYou asked: "Do you see the parental role having a liaison component to it, too?"
You also posted a definition of liason: "definition: communication for establishing and maintaining mutual understanding and cooperation"
Based on that definition I would say parenting does not have a liason component at all. I see the biblical position of parent described as steward. Children are a gift from God, given to parents for a time and given the specific task of training them up, so like arrows they can be shot out. I believe the target is a disciple of Jesus Christ.
So I don't see there being a mutual cooperation, but an authority and one under authority with the one in authority given that authority by God to train and discipline in love to follow the Lord.
This is why fundamentally i'd have to disagree when you said earlier that: "I want my children to be able to know how to deal with folk from a wide range of life. I want them to have chance to work with folk of different races, socioeconomic status, culture, etc. That is part of the education, too." I don't see things like children knowing how to deal with folk from a wide range of life, work with folk of different races, socioeconomic status, culture, etc. as part of the responsibility of public education. I see them as part of a parents responsibility in training them up in the fear and admonition of the Lord. If I do my job in teaching my children God's word relative to the equality of all mankind as creations in His image, then they will know how to deal and work with all kinds of folk. Education (in the scholastic sense) is entirely about academics on my view. I train them up (moral, spiritual, societal, etc.) as I have been entrusted to do by God as my responsible charge in looking after His entrustment. Reading, writing, arithmatic someone else could do if situations arose in which I was unable.
We don't disagree on where authority lies, it seems, just in how things are worked out.
Out of curiosity, since you feel you are responsible for the holistic development of your children why not homeschool as a first priority and only send them to public school in a dire circumstance? You said earlier: "No doubt about it. If either of my children were struggling in public school, I would have taken them out and home-schooled." If you feel you are responsible holistically for your children's development why would your first decision be to send them away to be schooled up to the point they struggle and them pull them out? Why not be responsible holistically unless circumstances drove you to a different arrangement? Please understand, i'm not criticizing. I've already agreed you have the authority to do as your conscience dictates, i'm just asking the question because i'm hearing in my mind based on your comments you saying something like:
"I'm responsible for all aspects of my children's life so i'm going to send them to someone else for their spiritual, moral, social, etc. education until they begin to struggle; at that point i'll begin in the role I claimed to be responsible for in the first place."
This is why fundamentally i'd have to disagree when you said earlier... I don't see things like children knowing how to deal with folk from a wide range of life, work with folk of different races, socioeconomic status, culture, etc. as part of the responsibility of public education. I see them as part of a parents responsibility in training them up in the fear and admonition of the Lord.
ReplyDeleteOkay, me, too. And I'm using public schools as part of doing that. Why do you see that as problematic? I'm not saying it's public school's role to provide diversity, it's just it's nature, since public schools will, by its very nature, have kids from all parts of the public. I see that as a good thing.
Do you disagree?
You said...
If I do my job in teaching my children God's word relative to the equality of all mankind as creations in His image, then they will know how to deal and work with all kinds of folk.
Well, as I stated alreaday, I AM doing my job in teaching my children God's Word, and part and parcel of that, for me, is to give them opportunities to mix it up with a range of people. It's one thing to say to my white, middle class child, "All God's children are equal, regardless of race or socioeconomic status." It's another thing altogether to provide them opportunities to work with, learn with, play with, worship with folk from all different backgrounds.
Public school is one part of that, for me. Do you find some problem in that approach? (Note, I'm not asking if you agree that this is how you want to do so for your children, just wondering if you see any problems in that approach).
Out of curiosity, since you feel you are responsible for the holistic development of your children why not homeschool as a first priority and only send them to public school in a dire circumstance?
For me (and I respect my fellow parents who have chosen a different route), that is one area where homeschooling is lacking - in providing the rich and wonderful (and yes, sometimes even difficult) diversity that can be found in public schools. I can create playdates or work/learning opportunities with a child or a few children from a diverse background as a homeschooler, but not as easily and, from what I've heard from my homeschool parent friends, it just doesn't happen as much.
As the one responsible for the holistic development of my children, my belief is that public school is the best way to do that.
You ask...
ReplyDeletei'm just asking the question because i'm hearing in my mind based on your comments you saying something like:
"I'm responsible for all aspects of my children's life so i'm going to send them to someone else for their spiritual, moral, social, etc. education until they begin to struggle; at that point i'll begin in the role I claimed to be responsible for in the first place."
Because, for me, being responsible for my children's life, I'm working with the schools (with my church community, with my neighborhood, with volunteer opportunities) to help them get their academic education in a setting of my choosing that provides opportunities for a much richer education beyond just the numbers and letters. For me, homeschooling can't provide that.
Even though I live in an "urban" and diverse neighborhood and attend an "urban" and diverse church, I want to provide my children the chance to learn not JUST academics, but how to work with, play with, learn with children from different backgrounds - even backgrounds that are out of my control. I want my children to learn to deal with bullies, if need be. I want my children to learn to deal with work teams where some individuals don't pull their weight or where they have different learning styles and learn that, hey, that's okay. That's good and it helps in the long run.
Why? Because I'm preparing them for the real world and this is the way the real world is.
Does that make sense?
As I said, I have homeschooling friends and know what they have done, but tell me: How do you go about teaching your children to work with children with disabilities of all sorts, to work with children with different learning styles and different commitments to quality of work?
In your experience, do homeschool children get chances to work, learn and play with children from a variety of races, languages and socioeconomic levels (and not just on a once a month/once a week play date, but on a regular ongoing basis)? Or is that not a critical issue for you?
It is for us because, as I said, this is the real world that I'm raising them up to be prepared for.
And let me tell you, it's worked well for us. My son is 19 years old, finished his first year of college and is basically almost a junior. He is thrifty and (sometimes) a pretty hard worker. He has a job this summer working with some urban kids who are, at times, quite a handful and yet, from the reports I hear, he is doing a smashing job.
He commutes to this job through our urban neighborhoods on public transit, passing by the homeless, the mentally ill, the poor and just plain regular folk and he does so fearlessly and with a tremendous amount of grace and level-headedness.
I couldn't be prouder and I don't think we could have done it as well if we had homeschooled. That's what has worked best for us.
One more, you said...
ReplyDeleteYou also posted a definition of liason: "definition: communication for establishing and maintaining mutual understanding and cooperation"
Based on that definition I would say parenting does not have a liason component at all.
You don't think parents need to communicate and establish mutual understanding and cooperation for their children in various life circumstances? I'm not sure I follow.
Do you take your children to church (or other places) and do they interact with Bible classes and adults outside of your oversight? If so, don't you HAVE to coordinate mutual understanding and cooperation between your family and the various adults they interact with?
Dan,
ReplyDeleteI'm pretty sure my comment answered all the questions in your subsequent response. I'll repeat mine here:
"I don't see things like children knowing how to deal with folk from a wide range of life, work with folk of different races, socioeconomic status, culture, etc. as part of the responsibility of public education. I see them as part of a parents responsibility in training them up in the fear and admonition of the Lord. If I do my job in teaching my children God's word relative to the equality of all mankind as creations in His image, then they will know how to deal and work with all kinds of folk. Education (in the scholastic sense) is entirely about academics on my view. I train them up (moral, spiritual, societal, etc.) as I have been entrusted to do by God as my responsible charge in looking after His entrustment. Reading, writing, arithmatic someone else could do if situations arose in which I was unable."
You seem intent on portraying my view as being against public schools in total. I am not. What my original post was about, and what I have been specific in addressing is the parents authority to make decisions. You chose public school, that is your responsibility as the authority which goes to my point. I have no problems with parents sending their children to public school. I attended public school, so my own parents choose just as you did.
Let me be clear, my position is that parents should be the authority. I will remind you of my original post where I provided a link and cited those in acedemia today who would seek to ban home-education. That position undercuts the authority of the parent and is therefore an untenable position.
Dan (cont'd.):
ReplyDeleteNow, you ask:
"In your experience, do homeschool children get chances to work, learn and play with children from a variety of races, languages and socioeconomic levels (and not just on a once a month/once a week play date, but on a regular ongoing basis)? Or is that not a critical issue for you?"
What is critical to me is that my children understand the biblical truth that all men are created equal, and therefore deserve to be treated as God's image bearers no matter how they look or smell or talk. I don't believe they must have constant exposure to a diverse group of people to love their neighbor as themselves, they only need to know the truth. If it helps, my oldest son (soon to be 7) has never met a stranger. He walks up to all children, introduces himself and can talk or play effectively with anyone regardless of color or disability. I have seen him do it on playgrounds on many occasions. He stepped in front of a bully just a few weeks ago at a fast-food play place that was hitting other children. He put himself between the smaller children and the bully to be hit himself without returning blows until an adult could intervene.
Just a few examples I have personally seen. You see, I believe that intent is prior to content. If my children's hearts are right, if they love God and are seeking to follow His commands, they will treat everyone rightly. It is not requisite to expose them to a diverse population on a regular basis, they need only know the truth of God's word.
You said: "Because, for me, being responsible for my children's life, I'm working with the schools (with my church community, with my neighborhood, with volunteer opportunities) to help them get their academic education in a setting of my choosing that provides opportunities for a much richer education beyond just the numbers and letters. For me, homeschooling can't provide that."
Again, this just goes to my point. As the authority, that is your decision to make. I am certain God can bless public school, private school, home-school or any other educational process.
Finally, you said: "You don't think parents need to communicate and establish mutual understanding and cooperation for their children in various life circumstances? I'm not sure I follow." Once again, i'll copy my previous response:
"I see the biblical position of parent described as steward. Children are a gift from God, given to parents for a time and given the specific task of training them up, so like arrows they can be shot out. I believe the target is a disciple of Jesus Christ.
So I don't see there being a mutual cooperation, but an authority and one under authority with the one in authority given that authority by God to train and discipline in love to follow the Lord."
Then you ask: "Do you take your children to church (or other places) and do they interact with Bible classes and adults outside of your oversight?"
My children are 7, 4, 2 and 6 months. We don't leave them anywhere without us except on occasions where my wife and I have opportunity to go on a date and we get a sitter. We have three adults who are like-minded that watch them for a few hours on those occasions. In those situations, we have ensured like-mindedness with the adults and have taught our children that those adults are in authority until we return. Again, it's not a matter of cooperation and mutual understanding but one in authority and those who are under authority.
You seem intent on portraying my view as being against public schools in total.
ReplyDeleteThen I have miscommunicated or you have misunderstood. I haven't said anything about you being against public school and didn't intend to write anything to suggest you were. I was just answering your questions and comments as to why I like public school and how it fits in with my raising my children.
Again, it's not a matter of cooperation and mutual understanding but one in authority and those who are under authority.
I reckon we disagree on this one. I don't think that letting my children (under my supervision) go to school or Sunday School or volunteer at shelters or go to summer camps outside my range of view in any way at all diminishes proper parental authority.
Of course, when my kids were your kids' age, they weren't out of sight as much as they are now, but the point remains.
May I ask: You all don't have Sunday School at your church, or do you go to a home church or what?
Dan,
ReplyDeleteYou said: "I don't think that letting my children (under my supervision) go to school or Sunday School or volunteer at shelters or go to summer camps outside my range of view in any way at all diminishes proper parental authority." That's not what I intended with my comment. Being a parent is being in authority, which means making decisions for your children. Public school, sunday school, shelters, summer camps, etc. are all things that you decide as the authority. What I take issue with is the idea (if I understood the definition correctly) that there is some cooperative effort between the child and the parent to determine what is right for the child. The parent is the authority, the child is the one under authority. Perhaps that clarifies things a bit.
You asked: "You all don't have Sunday School at your church, or do you go to a home church or what?" We do not have Sunday School, youth group, or other age seperated groups as a regular program at our church. It is not a home church, but we do have mid-week meeting at homes.
Being a parent is being in authority, which means making decisions for your children.
ReplyDeleteNot in my family. Not exactly. I am in authority and in that role, I move my children from me making decisions for them to teaching them to make decisions for themselves. That is my understanding of teaching them to grow up, where they can make decisions for themselves. Good decisions.
Now, does that mean I let my 6 year old decide if she wanted to drive the car to the beach? No. But I taught them to make small decisions for themselves when they were small, and they have grown to make big decisions for themselves as they've gotten older.
I want my children to learn to make right decisions, good decisions for themselves. Part of doing that, for us, anyway, is practice making decisions.
Perhaps that's what you mean, too? You don't intend to make all your children's decisions for them until they turn 18, do you?
The bottom line, being in authority does not, for us, mean us making decisions for our children. Being a parent means teaching our children how to live aright, as best we can, by God's grace. And we have judged public schools to be a great asset in doing this (which is not to say we are pleased with every little thing that happens in public school, but they are learning to live lives of Godly grace IN the world, while not being OF the world).
We do not have Sunday School, youth group, or other age seperated groups as a regular program at our church.
ReplyDeleteJust curious: What sort of church do you attend and what format is there? Where does Bible training take place, only in homes with parents and during the service?
Dan,
ReplyDeleteI think we're talking around the same topic just using different terminology. I see a difference between authority and responsibility. As the parent I am the authority over my children. As part of that authority I give them responsibilities (cleaning their room, helping with supper, driving their siblings to various events when they get older, etc.). I train them to be responsible by slowing putting them in positions of responsibility. I think this is what you are speaking of and we agree on. I see this as different than authority. God place me in authority over my children to train them up in the fear and admonition of the Lord. My children don't share in that, it is not mutual in any way. God in His authority, put me in authority in His Name over the home. When my children become of age and are married, they will leave us (move out from under our authority) and become the authority in their home over their children. That's the difference I see biblically between authority and responsbility and why I include each time in my comments that I see the parent/child relationship as being one in authority and one under authority.
I hope that clarifies a bit, because I don't think we disagree substantively on the responsibility part and it may just be a failure to define terms on the authority part.
Dan,
ReplyDeleteOur church is family integrated. Families worship together. We train our children to stay in service with us. As for training, I am responsible as the parent to train up my children in the fear and admonition of the Lord. I have devotions and prayer daily with my children and they receive teaching in a mid-week meeting at the home of another family each week and of course when the Word is preached on Sunday mornings.
What faith tradition, if you don't mind my asking? Something in the Protestant vein? Non-denominational? Baptist? Pentecostal? Church of God? Other?
ReplyDeleteJust curious.
We are considered non-denominational, but have families from many different backgrounds, Protestant, Catholic, Pentacostal, and others.
ReplyDelete