I may have more thoughts later, but right now I have young ones to take care of. I couldn’t find the quote I was looking for and am now wondering if what I was thinking of isn’t more my own construction or reaction to what I was reading. Or it was in a different book. Here is a table that represents what I was trying to get at, however…based on how the internal effects the external, how education effects government and government effects education. It might be helpful to note that this text defines government as “that which regulates and controls us” rather than the state necessarily. The goal of education is to become self-regulating, self-controlling, self-governing.

Anyway, here is the chart if you are interested. From “A Guide to American Christian Education for the Home and School.”

New scientific thinking (with video!) from Edge.org’s “Third Culture” on how our social networks create and recreate our changing reality, very much as biology does . . . it turns out that all kinds of things, many of them quite unexpected, can flow through social networks, and this process obeys certain rules we are seeking to discover.

We’ve been investigating the spread of obesity through a network, the spread of smoking cessation through a network, the spread of happiness through a network, the spread of loneliness through a network, the spread of altruism through a network.

And we have been thinking about these kinds of things while also keeping an eye on the fact that networks do not just arise from nothing or for nothing.

Very interesting rules determine their structure. . .

We have begun to understand human behavior, and we have models of rational decision-making — rational actor models —which have led to further innovations. But these models all pertain primarily to individuals.

Adam Smith talked about markets as a phenomenon that emerges from the action of individuals, but nevertheless we have primarily focused on the actions of individuals. How do we put all these parts back together to understand groups? Again, the study of social networks is part of this assembly project, part of this effort to understand how you can then have the emergence of order and the emergence of new phenomena that do not inhere in the individuals. . .

Not only is education a reflection of a society’s values, it affects what those values will be.

“Your fundamental issue is that you think you are better equipped as a parent to educate your child. This may very well be true.”

That’s not what Dana said. What she actually said was,

“The fundamental issue is whether the parent or the state is best equipped to look out for the best interests of children.”

This is not an issue specific to one parent, like Dana, or to several parents, such as Dana, Sunniemom, JJRoss, and me. Rather, this is a generic, philosophical issue - as a matter of philosophy and principle, who is better equipped to look out for the best interests of children - that parent, or the state?

Homeschooling parents - and I think most parents in America - would argue that the state is NOT the better equipped to look out for the best interests of children. Rather, it is their parents - the ones who bore them, nursed them, fed them, clothed them, taught them to smile and to eat and to walk and to talk and to use the toilet and countless other things - who are the best equipped to decide what is in the best interests of their children. Yes, that means that some parents will make poor choices - some will feed their children unhealthy food; some will scream at them; some will neglect to teach them their shapes - and some few will perhaps choose to homeschool and fail to teach them the skills many kids learn in school. But even if those things happen, our society still operates on the assumption that most of the time, parents are still the best able to decide what is best for their children. The state is simply a lousy judge of what is in the best interests of children.

As for requiring parents to prove they are not engaging in educational neglect - well, as Sunniemom has pointed out above, that’s no different than going into a parent’s home to check out their refrigerator to make sure they are feeding their children appropriately. Given no evidence that the children are being neglected, the state simply has no right to invade the family’s home in this way. (That said, I test my children every year, because I think it’s good for them; but I know homeschooling parents who believe testing is harmful or pointless, and I support their right not to test if they wish.)

The fundamental issue is, as Dana said, who should determine the best interests of children - the state, made up of dozens of faceless individuals with who-knows-what agendas or points to prove, who neither know nor really care much about the child; or the parents, who know the child best and live with the child day in and day out, who are most invested in the child’s success, and who in almost every case sincerely love the child?

I think we are beginning to look to government as an insurance policy against economic downturns, foreclosures, price fluctuations, unemployment, poverty, health issues, etc. To extend this “benefit” is only natural in this mindset, but for once, the target group doesn’t want the intervention. We don’t want the help.

And I really strongly believe that public schools are not failing as badly as we think. I think two things are going on…where they are failing, it is a symptom of the failing of our families. Because they are not taking responsibility, feeding their children, helping them with homework, and checking up on what is going on in school. Without parents, the public school (or any school) is doomed to failure. It cannot do what Horace Mann wanted it to do. The other part of that is a PR campaign gone horribly awry. The teacher’s union not only causes problems, but then accentuates them in the media while they push the image that teachers could do more if they only were paid more.

The socialist indoctrination is a barrier in seeing the real education that goes at home.

I have said on more than one occasion that parents with children in the system should be held accountable to have their kids in school, on time, dressed appropriately, fed, and with their homework done to the teacher’s satisfaction. Oh, the indignation when I dare suggest such a thing! Which is one reason why, IMO, public schools are just one more big blood-sucking vampire of a welfare program that is more socially acceptable than food stamps and Medicaid.