How This Public School Teacher Views Homeschooling
Yesterday when I woke up, I had two posts in mind that I thought were going to be a) hilarious and b) worthy of a Pulitzer 
. I have yet to write either of them. Steve Olson’s recent post threw me completely off track. But that’s good.
Blogging is not only about acting, but about reacting to what you read. That’s what’s cool about it, and that’s what makes it different from print journalism.
I am as you probably have figured out, a public school teacher. Specifically, I teach mathematics at the high school level in a school located in an exurb of a major American metropolitan area. The kids I teach are what I would characterize as lower middle class, interspersed with lower class. (Socioeconomically)
In my post before last, I wrote about a lunchtime conversation with some of my colleagues. These particular colleagues have a very different view of the public’s perception of teachers than I do. I don’t want to repeat myself, so click over there, read the post, them come back here.
I’ve had some great feedback from that post. One reader in particular, took the time to email me and give me her thoughts, which were approximately that some (or many) teachers are whiners. They suffer from a martyr complex. They feel like no one should even have any opinion about the educational system except themselves. (In other words, they think they’re experts, and don’t care what parents and the rest of the world thinks.)
I responded by agreeing with her in general, although there are many exceptions, me for one.
This reader’s comments got my juices flowing, however, and I would like to explore some of my thoughts related to public education and its alternative, homeschooling.
In what I call the new media–blogs, talk radio, etc–and to some degree in the mainstream media, I believe it’s safe to say that the public’s perception of public education is fairly low. I’m constantly hearing (and having people actually ask me) about why all kids don’t learn to read and why they don’t learn their multiplication tables.
Then answer, succinctly, is this: if all elementary school teachers had to do was to teach reading and multiplication (let me add in fractions, too), then virtually all kids would graduate fifth grade knowing these skills. Sadly, elementary school teachers are charged with a curriculum so broad (and not very deep) that they get to spend maybe fifteen minutes three times a week for one of two years on these critical subjects.
I know, if you’re an elementary school teacher, you’re going to argue this point with me–and I encourage you to do so. Leave me a comment! I’ll be glad to respond to it.
I’m right, however. I see the fruits of our elementary school curriculum at the high school level with kids who consistently read below grade level and who reach for a calculator to multiply 2 x 3 (no joke!) or even worse have to turn all fraction problems into decimals in order to work them.
Parents see this, too. So does the public at large.
Education professionals are just beginning to see what the general public has known for the past thirty, almost forty years.
Reform is coming, but it’s coming slowly. What’s criminal is that yet another generation of Americans doesn’t learn basic academic skills that have a huge impact on their lives.
The ability to read and comprehend is huge! Last time I looked, we don’t have any job categories called “illiterate subsistence farmer.” So, everyone has to be able to read.
The ability to deal with numbers, called numeracy, is equally important. Look, most Americans do not use trigonometry in their every day lives, but everyone uses number sense!
Education professionals see the problem as complex, too complex! Yes, the problem is complex. There are socioeconomic factors, parent educational level factors, race factors, urban vs. rural factors… The problem is not, however, that complex.
All kids, unless they actually have a really severe learning disability, can learn to read and do arithmetic!
This disconnect between what the public sees and what education professionals are just beginning to see leads quite naturally to the idea of homeschooling.
As far as I can tell, I think there are two main thrusts to homeschooling.
One, parents who have strong, conservative religious values don’t want their kids going to public school. Although I’m not an ultra-Christian (I am a Christian), I understand their concerns completely. If you haven’t read it, take a look at this previous post.
The other group of parents who opt for homeschooling are the ones who just don’t think that public schools are doing a very good job of educating their kids, and they want to do it themselves. (That’s very American in the original sense, by the way.)
My wife and I know of a couple who are both doctors who homeschool their son–with great success, I might add.
I’m not sure, and correct me if you think I’m wrong, but I believe the original thrust for homeschooling came from the religious conservatives, but now that homeschooling has become more accepted, concerned parents are really looking at it as a viable option.
It should come as no surprise that most professional educators are against homeschooling. I am not. But most educators see homeschooling as an attack on the very idea of public school, which it is, and they don’t think that public school would survive this attack, which it might not.
Their argument goes something like this: If you let parents educate their own children, then that would suck out the better students from the public school, leaving only the poorer performing students behind.
This would do two things, take money from the public school systems (their money is based on students days attended) and it would deprive the underperforming kids of being in an environment that might encourage them to perform better.
It’s true that with fewer students the public schools would get less money from the federal government, but it’s not true that the higher achieving students would necessarily leave the school system. Higher achieving students tend to go to higher achieving public schools, so there is less pressure to leave to be homeschooled.
Although this is not what you’ll hear from education professionals, there have been only two school systems that have really tried a voucher system. I believe Cincinnati was one. The students who took advantage of the vouchers, left the public school system and enrolled in a private school were far and away the poorer performing students from underperforming schools. I’ll try to add a link to that study to this post, but it might be after I’ve published the post. (The study was done by the Feds.)
A big part of the difference between what educators see and what parents see is that educators tend to be collectivists (socialists). They truly think that what is good for one child, or for one group of children, has to be good for all children. Add a little hubris to this and you can see how public educators tend believe that they and only they have the answers.
Parents on the other hand are only really interested in their own children, and rightly so. So, parents are not collectivists when it comes to their views of education. They want to ensure that their children are well-educated, only then can they think about the public at large.
Educators really don’t understand this.
I’ve had education professors argue that it is immoral to pull your kid out of public school and put them even in a private school, that you are doing a disservice to the community at large when you do!
My counter to that was, and is, would you send your sick child to an underperforming public hospital just to support public hospitals in general, or would you find the best hospital for your child, public or private?
Even for liberals and socialists, surely the needs of your child must come before the needs of the group.
I’ve seen over the years a number homeschooled children enrolled in high school for their senior year because it’s easier to be accepted in college if you went to a traditional public school. With the exception of one child, all of these kids were far above where their classmates were academically. More importantly, they were socially much better adjusted.
Another argument against homeschooliing is that it’s unnatural!
That shows you how bizarre things have gotten. What’s unnatural is having a hundred or so children all the same age within a few months collected together taking their cues from each other instead of being in a broader community of ages, where they would learn self-respect and poise from older people and compassion from the younger children.
This lumping together of children of all the same age only aggravates the problem of teen alienation. In some sense, I suspect what we know as adolescence itself might actually be a by-product of mass public schooling.
To sum up, we need choice. In my estimation, parents must be seen as the primary decision makers for their children’s welfare and must be given the right to educate their children as they see fit.
Public school is not good for everyone. If we open schooling up to entrepreneurs and let government only validate diplomas instead of actually providing the education itself, I think we would see immense change for the better in only a few years.
Personally, my wife and I are almost sure to homeschool our kids when they reach middle school. The elementary school they go to is very good and they are doing well, but the middle school has issues. Also, it is in middle school that the problem with teenage alienation begins, and I want my kids home with my wife and myself so they can take their cues from responsible adults instead of a bunch of hormonal sixth-graders.
Homeschooling is not for everyone. It’s not even for the majority of our population. Most Americans are too ignorant themselves to even begin to think about educating their children. But for those of us who are sufficiently educated, homeschooling is a very viable option that should be carefully and openly considered by every parent.
If you like this post, then consider subscribing to my full-feed RSS!
Also, if you smoke, now's the time to quit! Buy my book, How To Quit Smoking: The Harold Cole Method! It's 100% guaranteed!
April 17th, 2007 at 4:46 pm
Okay, the only thing I disagree with is this: “But for those of us who are sufficiently educated, homeschooling is a very viable option that should be carefully and openly considered by every parent.”
Who decides what sufficiently educated means?
I think it’s great that you’re open to homeschooling, but it isn’t just about education, as I think you’ll find when your children come home. Most importantly, the level of education that a parent has attained according to what we traditionally view as “education” is absolutely no limit to the achievement of the homeschooled child.
Daisy
April 17th, 2007 at 5:57 pm
I enjoyed reading your post! About the point made by public teachers about the better students being pulled out so that leaves the underperforming students, I’d have to say that is utter nonsense! I have spoke with and read stories time after time of parents who have pulled their children out of the school system because their children were the underperformers, mainly because a public school teacher cannot take the extra time that child needs. Those that stay in wind up in remedial classes which causes its own set of problems.
Public education, as it is now, has only been around for about 150 years. To say that homeschooling is unnatural just goes to show that the public school teachers who use this line of arguement don’t know anything about history. I liked your point about teen attitudes being a result of the public education system. It drives me crazy when people say that teen attitudes are natural and you can’t do anything about it. The attitude of these parents also contributes to their teens behavior. Our teenagers don’t have to be rebels without a cause. I can show you thousands of teens whose parents have done something about it.
I have a lot of respect for public school teachers, I couldn’t do what they do, which is to say, I couldn’t put up with what they have to put up with and the politics and system they have to work in. What I don’t respect are teachers who don’t care, who have bought the socialist party line, believe all parents are incapable of knowing and raising their own children, and whine about the amount of money they make.
#1 You had to of known what the pay was when you started that job and if you don’t like it then don’t take it. Teachers aren’t the only ones not getting paid what they are worth. #2 The system itself largely helped to create the problems that teachers have to face so if they want to gripe about not being paid enough, then complain about and at the NEA. Not that the NEA would listen to that line of thought.
Again, I enjoyed your blog. Thanks for letting me comment.
Abiding in the Vine!
April 17th, 2007 at 8:58 pm
Daisy, I have to agree with your disagreeing with me! Thanks! Let me clarify what I meant. (Or perhaps I just learned something from your excellent comment!
)
No one needs to decide anything about parents and their children except the parents. As a society, as a nation, we must give the family back to the family. Family has been encroached upon way too much by government. Government needs to stay out of the business of raising children except in the most egregious of circumstances–obviously criminal activity directed at the child.
Now, when I say that homeschooling is for people who are “sufficiently educated” that is really for the parents to decide. I have no problem at all with a high school educated parent educating their child. 1) That’s their child and they need to raise that child as they see fit. 2) On a more practical note, just because you only finished high school doesn’t mean that you don’t have enough sense to take advantages of all of the resources that are out there. For instance, if math is not your strong point, you could hire a tutor. (As a matter of fact, soon I’m coming online with a mathematics teaching site to address this issue.)
I hope this clarifies my post!
As always, I appreciate your comments!
April 17th, 2007 at 9:01 pm
Sagerats, Thanks you for seconding me about the phenomenon of alienated teens! I had a fellow tell me two years ago that I only had about five or six more years go enjoy my kids, because by that time they would be twelve and not want to hang around with me. I loved being around my father my whole life–even when I was a teen. (And I was a really rebellious teen!) This teen thing, which has only gotten worse, is part of what is destroying the American family.
Thanks for the input!
April 17th, 2007 at 9:22 pm
Bravo! Came here through the Carnival of Homeschooling. I’m going to put a link to your blog. I come from a family of public school teachers. You should hear them whine at T-giving! but would they ever consider hsing, not on your life! That would be abandoning ship!
April 17th, 2007 at 10:07 pm
Christy, thanks for the comment! Let me be clear about something. If you read around in the blog, you’ll see references to my job as a public school teacher. Just because I’m a teacher does not mean that I fail to see the huge flaws in the system. On the other hand, just because I see flaws does not mean that I 1) do not enjoy my job (I enjoy it more than any other job I’ve ever had.) and 2) do not do my best to be an excellent educator. I am a really good teacher and proud of it. Having said that, for the welfare of our children and our nation, something’s got to change!
Visit often! Lee
April 18th, 2007 at 2:04 pm
My father was also a public school math teacher, but he taught at the upper elementary and middle school levels. His biggest complaints with the system were against administrators, unions, and the general poor setup of the system that discuraged the best teachers. His example led me to become a volunteer math tutor. I have for the last 13 years been a volunteer remedial reading tutor. (If you can’t read, you can’t read your math problems on instructions very well. I’m sticking to reading tutoring because it’s more foundation than math, and that’s where I believe God wants me now.)
Teaching reading can be done in 15 minutes three times a week if you do it the right way–phonics with no sight words. It can be done. Phonics Pathways is an excellent book that doesn’t use sight words, and Don Potter’s 1824 version of Webster’s Speller is another excellent method that uses no sight words. He also has available a free book called blend phonics that is very easy to use in the classroom.
And, if you follow up a good phonics program with 5 - 10 minutes a day of spelling based on phonetic spelling rules in grades 1, 2, and 3, you will get an excellent speller and reader with very little effort.
You can find Webster’s Speller and some other great free phonics programs at Don Potter’s Page: http://www.donpotter.net/ed.htm.
And, you can find a history of reading instruction here: http://www.thephonicspage.org/On%20Phonics/historyofreading.html It shows an interesting period from 1826 to 1876 where an elecutionary mode of whole word teaching was used. I found out about this era from Geraldine Rodgers’ “The History of Beginning Reading,” and have verified it from research at the Library of Congress.
You might also find interesting this about the harmful effects of sight words: http://www.thephonicspage.org/On%20Reading/sightwords.html
Finally, I have free online spelling and phonics lessons that you can recommend to any of your students who read or spell below grade level.
April 18th, 2007 at 2:17 pm
Here’s a link to Don Potter’s page that should work better, who needs punctuation, anyway: http://www.donpotter.net/ed.htm
And, the full title of Blend Phonics is: Reading Made Easy with Blend Phonics for the First Grade
April 24th, 2007 at 11:46 pm
Hi,
Actually, many homeschoolers believe that hippie-type parents were really the first homeschoolers, but that people didn’t start homeschooling in large numbers until conservative Christians started doing it. Both groups wanted to keep their children away from the schools, but for different reasons.
April 25th, 2007 at 1:36 am
Amanda, thanks for the info. I can see hippies being homeschoolers. And why not. I think a large part of the whole issue is that parents should be the ones who decide what their children learn and how they learn it. thanks for the comment!
April 26th, 2007 at 3:00 pm
“Although I’m not an ultra-Christian (I am a Christian), ”
What is the difference between an ultra-Christian and a Christian? If there is such a thing as an “ultra”, why aren’t you one?
I also am a public school teacher who home schools and public schools. Personally, I consider myself a “Jesus Freak” as do others. However, we don’t homeschool out of fear, and neither should any Christian, or ultra christian or hippie or hippie christian, for that matter.
If you are going to pull your kids from Public School when they hit middle school, you are risking your relationship and your ministry to your own kids.
I would talk to others who have made this same decision in the name of sheltering kids from the “EVIL” influences of the world.
2 Timothy 1:7
for God gave us a spirit not of fear but of power and love and self-control.
Check out this post called “Why I don’t homeschool” By Tim Challies http://www.challies.com/archives/002247.php
There is a part 1 and part 2 and it is very good (Read the comments, too!)
April 26th, 2007 at 6:13 pm
Roadrooster, thanks for this detailed comment. Like so many of the great comments I’ve gotten on this blog, a worthy reply to your comment is going to take a whole post, instead of a quick reply. So, I suspect my next post or two will be both a reply to your comment here and an expansion and reflection on what I said. I would like, however, to address two issues you’ve brought up.
Why do I make the distinction between “ultra-Christians” and Christians? I read your comment this morning, and I’ve been mulling this over nearly all day. I believe I was trying to draw some sort of distinction between Christians who believe their own version of Christianity is the only path and Christians who are more ecumenical, or even interreligious. I’m obviously of the interreligious sort.
As far as the power spoken of in Timothy. I believe the power, love, and self-control that God has given me does not mean that I have to choose to send my children to be schooled in an institution that in some respects has more in common with Gomorrah than the haven of safety and learning that I believe school should be.
Finally, and this might be the most important part of this response. I’m basically a pragmatist. I rarely operate by applying theory or doctrine (even if it’s 100% correct) to the world I live in. My approach is more seeing and understanding reality and then navigating my way through it using the wisdom of theory and doctrine to my advantage.
I am entirely cognizant that my approach might be completely bogus. This way of dealing with the world, however, has evolved through my life and has gotten me successfully through some extremely trying times. In other words, from a pragmatic point of view, I do what I do because it works.
I’ll enlarge on this more in my next post or the following one.
Again, thanks for the very thought provoking comment. I’m coming to realize this is what blogging is all about.
April 28th, 2007 at 1:55 am
[…] of my readers has taken me slightly to task for a remark I made in a recent post about being merely a Christian, as opposed to an ultra-Christian. I’m a fast writer, and I […]