I have been thinking a lot about this recently as I prepare to include my son in more formal learning. My daughter thrives on being given as much independence as possible. My son thrives on structure. I am trying to find some sense of balance, a happy medium. Then I found this question:
The formality and structure created by going to school everyday is lost in homeschool. Monday through Friday there is a routine, a sense of purpose. No confusion or ciaos. A learned respect of the adults that are teaching them. A respect for all people is gained by following the rules in school, as do in, the rules is society. Created to maintain order. When is this learned in homeschooling? Grove Street’s Weblog
And that sort of united some of my seemingly disparate thoughts on the subject as I wrestled with a response.
In 1989, a rather humorous collection of essays hit the best seller list and refused to budge: All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten by Robert Fulghum. Obviously it resonated with Americans as it became the second longest running #1 bestseller in 23 years. But I maintained then and I maintain now that if you wait until kindergarten to learn the basic life principles he outlines in his book, you have gotten a rather late start.
It is in the family that we first learn our own worth. To share. To not hit. To clean up our messes. To say sorry. To hold hands. To respect others. To wonder.
Like Dennis in Martian Child, it is where we learn what it means to be human. And if that process is botched early in childhood, the best teachers in the best schools will find it difficult to overcome. The family is the foundation of society. If we have healthy families, we will have a healthy society. If our families are characterized by chaos, our society will be as well. All because it is the family which primarily prepares the child for and introduces the child to living in concert with other human beings…for living in society.
But what of structure and routine? The nice rows of desks, or the groupings at tables? The principal’s office? The lockers? The recess monitor with her shrill whistle calling you back in after recess. Is there not value in this? Doesn’t this prepare us for “the real world?” I’ve read multiple responses to this basic question, mostly centered on Stephanie’s comment about an “assembly line education.” But I think the real issue lies a little deeper and necessitates what may seem to be an odd question.
What is structure?
1. Something made up of a number of parts that are held or put together in a particular way: hierarchical social structure.2. The way in which parts are arranged or put together to form a whole; makeup: triangular in structure.3. The interrelation or arrangement of parts in a complex entity: political structure; plot structure.4. Something constructed, such as a building.
A school provides a structure and places that on children. It controls the environment around the child in order to encourage conformity. It is what most of us grew up with and thus it is easy to perceive it to be the only way, the right way or the best way to introduce children to adulthood and to society. But that isn’t necessarily the case.
Home education, in its ideal, also provides a structure for children although it is different in form and function. The point is more about inspiring the child and teaching the child to take responsibility for his or her own learning. It is about seeking real-world connections and developing a habit of scholarship, wonder and, most of all, ownership.
Many of us do finish the school day in less time than the public school because we have the advantage of more individualized instruction and fewer interruptions. I can see where this question comes from:
What job can you work for an hour and then go out and hug trees? Ibid.
But it really does not follow. I can as easily ask what business expects you to sit quietly and wait until everyone else in the room finishes their work before you can move on. What happens after that two to three hours it takes to finish what is in the book does not mean that education has ended. It is in this extra time that home education has the opportunity to assist a child in discovering unique talents and real world experiences.
And these unique experiences seem to be sought after by colleges these days. Private universities have been seeking out homeschooled students for some time. But now public universities are as well. The University of California at Riverside has an interesting article posted on their website with an illustrative quote.
“The new homeschool admissions program seems to have attracted outstanding students, as we’d hoped,” said Frank Vahid, a professor in the Department of Computer Science who helped establish the program. “Some applicants showed exceptional accomplishment in certain areas of study or very novel life experiences, while many also had high grades in community college courses and strong SAT scores. It looks like we’ve tapped into a pipeline of great students.” UCRiverside
We are providing universities with a “pipeline of great students.” And not just for academic reasons, but for “novel life experiences.” It is precisely this freedom from the structure of the public school system which has presented some students with the opportunity to be highly sought after.
Hat Tip: Eternallearning Academy
____________
Why Homeschool points to an interesting article about how technology may destroy public education which provides an interesting extension to this discussion:
He makes the point that one of the things that keeps public schools going is reputation. When people work out ways to certify that a person has the equivalent of a high school education, public schools will be in real trouble.
Principled Discovery is a place to stop and discuss news and information related to faith, family and particularly education. Pour yourself a cup of tea and join the conversation! 
We have school on a regular schedule. If you were to count “lunch” and “recess” and PE and home ec. as classes, we take just about as long.
We just don’t count lunch and recess toward our hours. And we don’t “move on” if children haven’t grasped a concept yet. But really it’s the “skill sets” that people should be most concerned about rather than the content and structure of the program. It shouldn’t matter if I accomplish this with my children in one hour or twenty.
The thing about structure is that any framework must fit its purpose. Do buildings on the East Coast have the same structure as those on the West? How about those in Florida compared to those in Alaska, or the Philippines, or the Ukraine?
A structure that does not serve a purpose is worthless. There are many forms of organization. Even something as vast and in appearance as chaotic as space has an underlying order. Unless you know where and how to look, you won’t see it. Folks who have been institutionalized can’t imagine how home education could provide structure, but that’s because they don’t know where or how to look. They just assume that the absence of bells and buzzers means that all hell is breaking loose 24/7 in a homeschooled environment. How short-sighted is that, and where did they learn to be so obtuse?
So home educators create a structure that fits the child instead of one that fits the system and then crams kids into it. Which one sounds more beneficial and nurturing?
Actually, we’re MORE structured than the local public school because I’m home-educating a kiddo with autism. But you’re right; “structure” can look different one place to another. Good point!!
Your otherwise thorough essay missed an important fallacy in the first quote.
“A learned respect of the adults that are teaching them. A respect for all people is gained by following the rules in school, as do in, the rules is society.”
One thing these schoolchildren are emphatically not learning is a respect for adults. I’ve heard girls as young as 8 giggling together while making fun of their teachers. Schooled children have a much harder time making respectful eye contact with adults (at least in my neighborhood). I sent my daughter to school for one year (8th grade). She learned to be extremely disrespectful both of her teachers and of the rules in school. She observed kids cheating and prospering. She mimicked her friends (top students) in criticizing teachers.
School fosters disrespect for both authority and learning. It doesn’t have to be that way; but for some reason, in our present-day society, it is.
I was not impressed with the arguments at the blog you reference. Just before the “tree hugging” comment she says the “normal” job is: “Punch a clock and spend the eight and 1/2 hours at a location to collect a paycheck.” My response to that: Maybe homeschoolers want to raise children who aspire to more than that.
It’s great when a blog post makes us stop and think about what we are doing. That post just added more confirmation about the value of homeschooling. At least I can teach my kids logic.
Yes, let’s see — never learning the curriculum skills, how about designing a structure that at least helps kids learn to sleep, eat and um, eliminate by listening to their own rhythms, needs, and basic build?
Joanne Jacobs this week on school structure and ruined sleep
Insightful, as always. Your comment about less interruptions gave me pause. This year I feel that we’ve had more interruptions due to my little girls getting older and wanting to be involved. But then I realize my children are learning to respect one another.
Thanks for the encouragement to continue the “pipeline.”
Is it me, or was that blog edited after you posted this, Dana? Maybe I have blog blur, but I could swear the last few paragraphs weren’t there earlier. Weird.
There were a lot of problems with the entry, but I didn’t really want to get into the rest of it. His main point was about structure.
And Mrs. C, you are right. A lot of homes provide more structure but as Sunniemom pointed out it has to do with the purpose. What I was trying to get at was the difference between internal and external. Between helping the child take ownership and training the child to “punch clocks.”
I kind of like the guy/gal. Gaol is to become a millionaire at the end of the year by figuring out how to get his invention to market.
Suburbancorresponet, you are right. Respect is often not really taught or expected.
And Margaret, I agree. I left it because, well because that is what “work” looks like for many Americans. But I don’t think homechooling, even its more “liberal” forms, preclude a person from being successful even there. Employers seem to be complaining that what is lacking in their younger employees isn’t academic issues so much as character ones.
They want to clock in and clock out and collect a paycheck. The company wants some personal investment and responsibility. Initiative to do things well and better.
That initiative goes a long way regardless of the work environment.
I have never bought the idea that kids should be programmed like Pavlov’s dogs. Ring bell, time to change classes. Ring bell, time to eat. Ring bell, time to play. Ring bell, time to pee. Do not pass GO, do not collect $200.
I also don’t subscribe to “My life was hell, and I survived, so my kids will have to endure it too. And so should yours.” That doesn’t sound terribly inspirational. How does that form character, encourage responsibility or a zest for life? What about joy, for Pete’s sake?
For someone who seems to have initiative and enjoy freedom and creativity, I do not understand Grove Street’s observations and rejection of home education.
I think he just lacks any positive experiences. One bad interaction with a small group speaks more loudly to an individual than reams of statistics and facts. Our personal experiences are very convincing and I think positive personal experiences go further in overcoming some of the stereotypes and objections than even the most convincing arguments.
Re: the timeclock 8 hour job - it’s the attitude that’s important. Nothing wrong with jobs like that - the world needs people to work in jobs like that - if, as you say, the person has initiative to do it well. It seems that public school, where so many “punch in,” do their time and go home, might not prepare people to have the drive and initiative to make that job truly meaningful.
*claps* fantastic analysis.
Not to sound like too much of a snob ;-), but I really don’t know too many people who have “punch-the-clock” type of jobs. I want my kids to be prepared for a “creative class” occupation not some dead-end low-wage one.
Crimson Wife, my dad does.
But that is why I found Why Homeschool’s entry interesting. Those jobs types of jobs are largely in manufacturing, which has mostly moved abroad. Our economy is increasingly moving away from manufacturing and the we are so worried about preparing for the 21st century economy, whatever that is, that we see that reasoning cropping into the reasons behind education reform.
I think innovation and independence are key.
What does he mean lack of structure? We get up before noon on a daily basis!
Seriously, where do you find these schmucks?
I go through life, blissfully ignorant of their existence, and then you come along and burst my happy little bubble. Thanks, Dana.
Oh, it was all for you! Just to help you remember why it is you lock them in the closet in the first place. To provide structure.
WHAT is gonzo-journalism? From Grove Street:
Thank you for all you seriously committeed homeschoolers for commenting on my article. BTW-I am a woman and mother of three children who is practicing the art-style writing of Gonzo journalism. You need read back to who I am—- to understand my point of view. My homeschool articles was bases on a life- hyped up story of fiction. ****My article should be read as fiction.**** AND thank you for all of the exposure to my site.
Okaaaayyy…..
According to Wikipedia:
“Gonzo journalism tends to favor style over accuracy and often uses personal experiences and emotions to provide context for the topic or event being covered. It disregards the ‘polished’ edited product favored by newspaper media and strives for the gritty factor. Use of quotes, sarcasm, humor, exaggeration, and even profanity is common. The use of Gonzo journalism portends that journalism can be truthful without striving for objectivity and is loosely equivalent to an editorial.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzo_journalism
Created by Hunter S. Thompson.
“Hunter Stockton Thompson (July 18, 1937 – February 20, 2005) was an American journalist and author, famous for his novel Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. He is credited as the creator of Gonzo journalism, a style of reporting where reporters involve themselves in the action to such a degree that they become the central figures of their stories. He is also known for his promotion and use of psychedelics and other mind-altering substances (and to a lesser extent, alcohol and firearms), his libertarian views, and his iconoclastic contempt for authority.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_S._Thompson
Home education is more about inspiring the child to take responsibility for its own learning. That is true, in general, but you cannot claim to be the source of that. It is whatever inspires the child, you or anybody or anything, when it interacts with it/her/him. So you cannot control its methods, let alone what it learns. That depends on how society is perceived. So the child needs to develop his own method and that is where your help would fit in nicely: methodology.
I used to be a newspaper journalist and I can tell you that “Gonzo” journalism is the most irresponsible drivel imaginable. “Gonzo journalists” pretty much claim they can write whatever they want without considering the objective truth of it or the consequences to others before publishing.
THEORETICALLY, good journalists, before publishing something along the lines of, “Vaccines Cause AIDS,” would have to get two unrelated sources of authority (lady at Hy-Vee checkout doesn’t count!) and attempt to get a comment from the people who make the vaccines or administer for a well-rounded story. In short, be more like a scientist. You can come up with a hypothesis that “vaccines cause AIDS,” ask some well-known physicians in that line of expertise, etc. THEORETICALLY, in this fashion, many stories will not make print because they either are not true, or the reporter cannot get enough corroboration (even if it is true).
But YOU, the reporter, are never to become part of the story. A good story wouldn’t be YOU going into Hy-Vee, talking to the cashier, and printing that you KNOW that vaccines cause AIDS because of your conversation and limited personal experience.
So this blog author is really either not aware of the stigma of being labelled a “Gonzo” journalist, or is inciting and reveling in the controversy.
P.S. Bless you for your blog, Dana.
At least she said it should be taken as fiction.
“Gonzo journalism tends to favor style over accuracy and often uses personal experiences and emotions to provide context for the topic or event being covered. It disregards the ‘polished’ edited product favored by newspaper media and strives for the gritty factor. Use of quotes, sarcasm, humor, exaggeration, and even profanity is common. The use of Gonzo journalism portends that journalism can be truthful without striving for objectivity and is loosely equivalent to an editorial.”
That’s not journalism.
Structure is a concern for us as well and one of the reasons my son will be attending a school next year… but not the rigorous, extremely structured setting of public school.
The freedom home education allows has him not wanting to do anything in regards to learning because the “idea” of learning makes him think school and his idea of homeschooling means “no school, nor anything it entails.”
He is curious, investigative, interested in all the world offers–I often cannot keep up with his interests and burning questions, but the idea that he is learning through this repels him.
The school he will be attending has a structure and routine, but offers much freedom within it. Freedom of exploring and working on what interest him, not a set curriculum; freedom to just zone out if he is needing that at the time; freedom to get up and move about ,to get a snack or get drink or use the restroom at anytime with out first seeking permission; freedom from any and all homework; freedom to choose.
We are happy with this decision for the time being and hopeful that as my son matures he will see that learning is not about school, rather it is about life and we can return to home education with him leading the way and me as a support.
I think that subsequent posts on G. S.’s blog pretty much put to rest any need for me at least to bother with further engagement. I thought that the comments were mostly quite kind, gave her the courtesy of assuming that she wanted to be taken seriously and responded politely to her comments. I must have missed the memo about comments = offensive attacks.
[Numerous snarky remarks originally written here]
Seriously, Dana, where do get these screeds?
All this chatter about little ole me. Interesting group. You confirmed that you are elitist and snobs better that those poor public or private schooled kids. “We aspire more of our children.” Yeah, well, what if you die and your child is alone. In foster care or with other family members who disagree with you, too. What will this child do? “WE skip lunch, recess…”That’s when kids socialize…duh. No socialization. This is riddled with crap. Don’t bash me elsewhere –bash me to my face. You people don’t know like you know how to have fun. How sad? No mamoosas with the other moms while the kids are out at school.
BTW- gonzo journalism is a style of writing I like. I don’t get paid. And I get lots and lots of people talking about me. Thanks
JOB 20:3 I hear a rebuke that dishonors me, and my understanding inspires me to reply.
Apparently the Grove Street blogger can’t make up her mind what she is- at first she appears to be serious, then she says she is writing fiction, then she starts ranting again and is angry that people responded to a public blog that is open for comments. If she doesn’t want folks to comment on her blog, why not just turn off comments?
After reading her last senseless post, I plan to respect her wishes not to be taken seriously.
Grove street–
No one is bashing you. You are the person accusing others of being elitist, snobs, not allowing our children to socialize, etc. All I did is answer your question about structure and you return with personal insults?
Very mature.
And I’m not sure how long you have been blogging, but generally when someone has more to say than a paragraph or so, they take the discussion to their own blog. It is considered a compliment.
Insulting those you disagree is not a good start if you want to make the case that they are the ones that are elitist snobs.
Sebastian, I missed your comment. For as aggressively as she got after about the second paragraph, I was actually surprised that the comments stayed as pleasant as they did. I even almost put a warning in my post that past that paragraph it turned rather more into a senseless rant. Gonzo style as I now know.
But I take it that that level of discourse is to be expected, being all Gonzo and all.
The muppet is a lot more fun.
What’s a “mamoosa”? I was a sorority girl and am familiar with any number of different cocktails but not that one….
I suspect that many of us will, however, be having a mimosa with our Mother’s Day brunch
//You people don’t know like you know how to have fun. How sad? No mamoosas with the other moms while the kids are out at school.//
OK, that is the very first time I have EVER heard that argument for not homeschooling! How unique.
You’re not supposed to write more than a paragraph in the comments!??? REALLY, Dana?
I’ve been rude all this time and didn’t know it. Sorry, everyone. :[
Oh goodness. I knew I should have gone back and reworded that comment.
Please. All of my commenters. A LOT of you write more than a paragraph and I LOVE it. If you look at my new comment policy, the higher level of discourse is not even possible with a single line.
My real point was that it is a compliment to have someone link to you…to consider the discussion worthy of discussing with their readers, even if there is a disagreement.
Okay, I was sitting out this round but really, it’s just too ridiculous as a discussion about “home education.”
What if I die and my child is alone??
Life-and-death questions like that are what School is least able to give us the right answers for —
It did bring a movie to mind though, anyone remember The Little Princess? The mother’s already dead abd the dad sends the young daughter to boarding school when he’s sent to war, where they’re each alone but strong and brave in their bad situations, because they had loved each other so much and been so close and happy as a family before. Until — tragedy! — word comes to the school that he has died, at which time the school treats the girl very badly now that there are no PARENTS to answer to; nothing has prepared her to rise above it and keep living and loving, EXCEPT what she learned from her life before School!
I was just thinking- if one were to judge public education by the movies produced and songs written about it, what would be the conclusion one would reach?
That’s as good as any ‘evidence’ I have seen presented by Lessenberry or Laden or Downes or Grove Street as a basis on which to judge home education.
The extraordinary John Legend was himself homeschooled during part of his childhood, and now calls his new recording label HomeSchool with some highly evolved and beautifully socialized reasoning behind the name, shouldn’t that count too?
Hi Dana, I enjoyed your thoughtful and well reasoned post.
I am always amazed at the anti-homeschoolers that think homeschool Mom’s never have a chance to get out and do things on their own.
As for grovestreet she seems to be a mass of illogical contradictions as she stated on her blog that homeschoolers were not welcome to comment and that if they took the trouble to do so they would be deleted and then wanted to take homeschoolers to task for not commenting on her blog.
I enjoy structure so our homeschooling is fairly structured but I know successful homeschoolers who have very little structure in their day.
Not surprising. Her “style” that she aspires to is noted for favoring emotion over fact and tends toward exaggeration, sarcasm and the profane. So I’m not really thinking it is productive to attempt to engage in the discussion. Since discussion is not the goal.
Why would I engage in a discussion with this group? Lots of criticism over my spelling, writing style. What is lost is the geniune understanding of why you homeschool. Read all of these comments back and place yourself in my shoes. No empathy. My article was my honest feelings and was not harshly attacking anyone or used profanity- it was a generalization. Thank goodness this group did not call me a B****. BTW- can’t re-edit a comment and my time is limited to sit and do editing in one sitting. MIMOSA- I don’t spell it - I drink it. (JOKE)
grovestreet- Pardon me for pointing out that you have made no effort at genuine understanding nor have attempted in any way to discuss home education. Your blog posts were irrational and emotional outbursts, filled with insults and disparaging insinuations, and IMO the first set of responses that you received (which you have now deleted) were gracious, considering the unprovoked attack on a lifestyle about which you know nothing. How interesting that when a few folks responded in the same spirit in which you yourself wrote, you melted into hysterics and a burst of editing posts and deleting comments. No one coming along now could possible decipher what was actually said on your blog.
FYI- Homeschoolers are parents from every walk of life- religious, financial, ethnic… and have chosen homeschooling for reasons that would require ages to enumerate. Making generalizations about homeschooling is like generalizing about Canadians, or people who eat at McDonald’s. Not possible. The only thing we all have in common is a dedication to and love for our kids, which also happens to be something that MOST parents have in common. Parents make many, MANY choices in the best interests of their kids- whether it is about what to watch on television or to eat their broccoli or wear a jacket in the rain. Imagine that- home educators as just plain ol’ parents who have taken another route to provide their kids with a good education. So why the hostility and hysteria?
Since your blog is a work of fiction, I accept it as such, but if you are going to come and play in our backyard, expect to abide by the rules of verbal engagement.
grovestreet, chill.
This post did not criticize you. You asked about how homeschooling can provide structure, and I took up that portion of your entry, choosing to completely ignoring the rant which constituted the rest of your entry.
Until your comment, all the discussion was about structure. And nothing in your comment contributed to the discussion. You did not provide any new argumentation but only baseless insults.
Two people responded to the spelling of the word Mimosa. Would you have preferred they called you an elitist snob who has no clue? Because that seems to be the only level you seem to be able to operate on.
Kudos to those who take an insult directed at them and only respond with a joke about spelling and the irrelevance of Mimosa’s to “having fun”
Nothing about saying that homeschooling does indeed provide structure means that a homeschooler is “elitist.” And “wanting more” for your child does not make you a “snob.” It means you are a loving parent and I assume that most parents, homeschoolers or not, feel the same.
I understand that “gonzo journalism” is your style and that is fine. But I don’t know how to engage productively in a discussion with someone who adheres to that style. I’ll refer you to my Comment Policy for subsequent discussion.
And what is lost in your refusal to participate in civil debate is any ability to communicate with you because you refuse to drop the insulting tone and assumptions about people you do not even know to even realize that no one here has insulted you.
Know, however, that this will be the last I will respond to the “gonzo” style if it cannot produce something close to a civil conversation.
Mimosas. Not Mimosa’s.
Back to the original point of home education “structure” — we are radical unschoolers and have no school-like structure whatsoever to our days. There IS no school day, for us. Also no school curriculum or calendar or vacation, no school standards or schoolwork or homework, et cetera.
Our family would look pretty traditionally structured, though. As would our house and neighborhood, civic and consumer activities, and entertainment choices.
And I do believe that arguments benefit from a high degree of academic structure!
Good points. We tend to think of “structure” in narrow terms. I was trying to show the difference between the externally applied structure of the school system other ways of maintaining structure. The school system’s structure certainly serves its purpose and I’m not going to argue that it is bad or necessarily harms children. It just isn’t the only way. And regardless of how well it serves certain purposes, it doesn’t mean that that is the only way to achieve the same purpose, ie., a productive and engaged citizen.
Who hopefully can participate in a civil discussion on the internet at the very least.
Sometimes our instinctive reaction to the word ’structure’ is to picture a solid exterior that is for containment, but I prefer to think of structure as a framework around and on which we can build….anything. So structure in that sense gives more freedom, less restriction, while still having form and function.
Good point sunniemom, and LOL - you make me think of a Ray Bradbury short story called “October Country” in which the main character becomes convinced that his own skeletal structure is literally dissolving within his body, a life-ending problem because there will be no “him” without that definition by structure . . . which come to think of it, I used a year or two ago in a Culture Kitchen blog essay about cultural structures like factory and school schedules, that might actually connect to the ideas under discussion here?
First of all, let me say that I adore Gonzo. His performance in Muppets from Space was extraordinary!
Second, I would like to teel you that I am rather hurt that you guys have been having Mamoosas without me. I thought we were buds!
“teel”? I think that was tell! Alas, I too need to improve my editing skills.
(If I’d had a Mamoosa, that wouldn’t have happened!)
LOTP, the Muppets and a Mimosa sound good. Maybe we could concoct something and tune in to YouTube? But the closest thing I have to Mimosa in the house would be grape juice mixed with cooking sherry.
Y’all are invited over my place for a virtual mimosa in your choice of alcoholic or non-alcoholic version
So refreshing, thanks CW!