According to the brief bio at the top, Dr. Steven Parker “shares information and advice on how to keep your children happy and healthy all year round.” Apparently that includes stricter oversight over homeschooling. In response to the court decision in California, Dr. Parker writes:
I think we all can agree that teaching is so important it shouldn’t be left to amateurs and that children deserve the finest quality instruction we as a society can provide them. Additionally, this is a very important issue because it touches on an essential conflict: the proper role of the government in children’s education and upbringing versus parents’ rights to raise their children as they see fit. Healthy Children: Should Homeschooling be Illegal?
Amateurs. At least the NEA calls us “well meaning amateurs,” a phrase that went through blogs like wildfire. But what is an amateur? It is a nice word, coming from French meaning “lover of.” It was an amateur radio operator who provided the first news on the Titanic, an amateur mathematician who gave us Einstein’s theory of relativity, and it was an amateur in the field of electronics who gave us the first working electric television. Perhaps it is our consumer driven economy and values which has brought the respect of the amateur down to what it is today, but those who dedicated themselves to a craft for love rather than money should not be so casually dismissed. As Audio Minds concludes:
The notion that an amateur is somehow lacking in credibility is rather new to this world, and is absurd in the face of real histories.
Amateurs of the world, do not sell yourselves short: All too often it is the Amateur who makes the breakthrough discovery and it is the Professionals who get together and turn those discoveries into nothing more than mere repeated paradigms. Amateur or Professional?
In short, Dr. Parker, yes, I believe education and teaching can safely be left to amateurs. So long as we have a proper respect for what that word really means.
Then comes the conflict: the proper role of the government in children’s education and upbringing versus parents’ rights to raise their children as they see fit.
It is the same conflict brought up in numerous court cases. Unfortunately, that phrase “as they see fit” is always tacked on to remind us of those parents who really are not fit. But there is no right to raise your child “as you see fit” else there would be no CPS. The conflict exists between the state’s interest in an educated citizenry and the parent’s right to direct the education of their children. Not “as they see fit,” but until it has been proven that they are not fit to do so. What if I reversed the traditional phrasing of this conflict?
There exists a conflict between the parent’s right to direct the upbringing of their children and the government’s interest in educating them as it sees fit.
Unfortunately, there is at times a conflict between parental interests and governmental interests. But the real question is who we believe is better equipped to protect the interests of children. It disturbs me that in a free society, we so frequently tip the balance in favor of government rather than private citizens who have not done anything to arouse suspicion.
To be completely fair to Dr. Parker, his conclusion is that homeschooling needs oversight. It should not be illegal (nor restricted to those with credentials), despite his impressions of the practice. His views are balanced by opposing anecdotes from his practice. Homeschooler A, who despite no proper credentials did a wonderful job educating her children. And Homeschooler B, who homeschooled (apparently) out of fear of the world.
The Beckers were a very close knit, very religious family. They were quite suspicious of the outside world (myself included), full of sin and temptation and false prophets as it was. They worried mightily at the corrupting influence of the school environment on their kids. So they chose to homeschool their four children. As far as I could tell, much of their curriculum was focused on religious teachings and values. “Really,” the mother once confided in me, “I have no use for science and they only really need as much arithmetic as it takes to know how to pay their bills.” One of the kids did eventually go to a junior college; the others joined the family business, but all remained socially isolated and, as far as I could tell, had little interest in the world outside their parents’ domain.
I generally reject anecdotes used as proof. (I could as easily point to the teacher who had her students vote a kindergartener out of class as evidence that credentials do not mean anything when we are questioning the importance of qualifications. But I prefer arguments against certification not based on individual cases which are outside the norm.) At the same time, however, I cannot deny that these “types” of families are out there. Particularly in the beginning of homeschooling, when the legality had not been tested and families were more routinely harassed by officials, I have little doubt that the “average” homeschooler was a few more standard deviations from normal than today.
But these kinds of stories always leave me with numerous questions. I’m assuming here that no actual abuse is going on, and that the worst of their parenting is revealed in this paragraph. But here are my main questions:
How much different would life have been had these children been forced into school? This doctor seems to picture children “rescued” from their isolation and allowed to develop beyond the math needed to balance a check book. I envision twelve years of conflict between parental values and the demands of teachers. I imagine children apathetic about their studies and encouraged in that by their parents. I see a lot of teasing…a lot of social isolation. Not by choice, but rather by bullying. I see a somewhat extreme world view reinforced by negative experience.
I also question the conclusion. These children’s interests may stand in opposition to my own…to most of society’s, for that matter. But to the degree to which these views are not harmful, do not promote illegal activity and lead to them being able to support themselves, I think there is a point in a free society that we need to be content to let people be.
In his conclusion, Dr. Parker contends that parents should have the right to “responsibly take on the education of their children?”
I want to emphasize the word “responsibly.” Each state has its own standards (some are tight, others abysmally lax) on what that must be taught. Parents need to be held accountable if their homeschooled kids can’t cut it educationally.
“Responsibly” is one of those words that gets to me. On the one hand, of course I don’t support “irresponsible” parenting or educating. It is sort of difficult to argue with. But why is the assumption that irresponsibility is the norm? Why do we believe that parents need oversight in order to make responsible decisions for their children? As a doctor, I am sure Dr. Parker has run into parents who do not regularly offer nutritious meals to their children and allow too much junk food. Do we also want a board to oversee child nutrition, checking refrigerators and menu plans across the nation? Isn’t healthy eating too important to be left to “amateurs?”
Or do we put the burden of proof on the state that the parent is not adequately providing for their children rather than on the parent that they are?
Update: Scott from All in the Family adds his thoughts, looking more closely at the arguments from homeschooling’s detractors which Dr. Parker lists.
“the others joined the family business”
His anecdote would’ve been more appealing if the end result was, “the others joined the welfare lines.”
But in reality we know it is not an anecdote which educational system is more likely to leave students dependent on the welfare state.
To me, it demonstrates the extent to which we support a system for its ability to reproduce our values and priorities. Even when it means forcing them on other people’s children.
And “Josey,” thanks for your comment. I’m honored you read my blog even though you generally choose to remain anonymous. That might be aided if you remember to log me out before you jump in, though.
Oh, thanks for sharing the definition of amateur! We love learning, and that is one thing that cannot be said of every classroom led by professionals.
And yes, thanks for joining the discussion Josey.
I agree. What is wrong with joining the family business? Not everyone has to go to college to function as a productive citizen. In fact, I think it might even be good to start off learning a business instead of going into to debt for a piece of paper.
Aren’t the Olympic games restricted to amateur athletes?
I would ask Dr. Parker what recourse we have when public schools produce kids who ‘can’t cut it educationally’.
So long as they are held accountable…to the very parents we are suddenly so suspicious of.
Oops…forgot the link to the entry I’m talking about. Just added it to the post.
Wow…interesting piece he’d written, and great analysis. I do believe that this evening I may write to this as well, but taking a slightly different route with it. Thanks for the inspiration!
Another issue not addressed is the “education” that isn’t measured,ie: the skills, talents, abilities and drives of the individual kids.’ I always wonder why “those who know better”, think it is desirable to have a community of people who are identically educated. People are driven and learn so differently, that I think much creativity and innovation is lost in collective education.
“Aren’t the Olympic games restricted to amateur athletes?”
Suggest to a professional astronomer that the amateurs in his field are less capable and valuable to astronomy than he is and I’m betting you’d get a lot of laughter.
Some much younger than I am may not realize John Holt wrote a really wonderful book, Never Too Late, about his own delight and dedication to amateur cello playing as a beginner at 40.
One of the two men (Bopp) who discovered comet Hale-Bopp was an amateur astronomer.
I guess it depends whether your field is more interested in advancing knowledge or developing proprietary territories.
Looking forward to your analysis, Scott. There certainly are a lot of directions this could take. But I will say that as a doctor who obviously has serious concerns about homeschooling, I appreciate that he is open to the potential. I started in a similar place. That is why I think that it is largely positive experiences with homeschoolers which will benefit us more than the most well-crafted arguments.
And very true, Leslie. Often it is these “lessons not taught” which contribute most to our character…ultimately leading to greater success in learning.
Frankly, Dr. Parker’s article is classist. He implies that homeschooling is okay when done by upper middle class families like the Morgans and not okay when done by working class families like the Beckers. IMHO this same type of attitude played a significant role in the original 2nd Appellate Court ruling in the Long case. Many members of the elite in this country look down their noses at those who have less money and/or formal education than themselves- hence the appeal of the “nanny state”.
Aren’t the Olympic games restricted to amateur athletes?
Yeah, they were. Now they are “your vocabulary here” because of the introduction of professionals into the games.
Just like education.
Oh dear, CW — we can’t know for sure either way, I suppose, but surely the appellate court ruling in the Long case had ample reasons to disapprove in the Long case without merely being snobs.
How about the government being held accountable if schooled kids can’t cut it educationally? Is it? I don’t think so. How many drop-outs are there? How many kids graduate without any real academic skills? It’s pathetic.
What suburbancorrespondent said. Dr. Parker conveniently omits that it was the shortcomings in state education which led to the mass exodus into home education in the first place. The state’s shortcomings are never contrasted with those of homeschooling because it would expose the massive amount of flaws in our public educational system.
I wrote WebMD and asked if Dr. Parker’s grossly ignorant post (the man admits to having barely any contact with homeshoolers) passes as expertise on WebMD and if WebMD is comfortable with allowing this as a reflection of its content quality and accuracy. It will be interesting to see if I get any response.
In Nebraska, there are more dropouts than homeschoolers. And our capital city has a staggering graduation rate of 65%, deemed “embarrasing” by the superintendent. Omaha has a graduation rate of 55%.
But we have to spend our legislative energy and property taxes (which are above the national average) to chase down homeschoolers to solve a “problem” that isn’t even proven to exist?
I love Dr. Parker and think his views are pretty neutral and seems to me (if you really READ his blog) that he was trying to present both sides of a story and remain as neutral as he could. We shouldn’t be so sensitive to something that is really an opinion – and that is what all of these comments are – our own opinions and we are all entitled to them.
What is wrong with a little training and consistency with what kids are taught? Seems part of the reason to home shchool would be to keep the kids (to some degree) out of harm’s way – not keep them from learning what their “comrads” learn and to help them succeed later in life. We are doing our childern no favors by teaching them what we “think” they should learn or by teaching them what we want them to know….
Just my opinion (and I do home school my kids btw)
Susie
Susie, I did not criticize Dr. Parker…I only disagreed with him. He tried to present both sides and I am merely presenting my side. If we are “all entitled to our own opinions” that includes me and the other commenters here.
No one here has said that homeschooling has anything to do with keeping children from learning what their “comrads” learn. Or to keep them from succeeding later in life. My only points here (and I stand by them both) are that 1) “amateurs” are perfectly capable of educating their own children and certification is unnecessary and 2) anecdotes do not really qualify as solid evidence. I could as easily condemn the school system or call for drastic security reforms because of some of the recent abuse cases which have been publicized.
I can’t believe how many idiotic people are still relying on the government to “educate” and raise their children. Look at the state of these “schools” and what they are turning out as citizens in society. Look at the statistics of how many children are getting an “education” of really low quality.
I love (sarcasm) people who seem to think that I can’t raise and educate my children without intervention from the government. They are delusional at best. They have this mentality that if they can’t do it, then I can’t do it.
On second thought, maybe it isn’t the government that can’t cut it as much as it is lazy parents with no drive or ambition to take care of their own who can’t.
Maybe if “Dr.” Parker would spend his energy on revitalizing the school system, then we wouldn’t have so many unproductive and undeducated citizens being turned out in our society every year, who have been taught that the world owes them and that they are entitled to a government to answer their call to do everything that it can to save them having to do some real work in life.
I also have gotten to the point that I laugh at people who seem to think that only people with “Dr.” or other titles in front of or behind their names are the final authority on what is best for children. Heck, I have known my medical doctor for years and I don’t trust him that much. If he gives me a medication to take that I am not familiar with, I check it out before I swallow the first pill. Just because he has “Dr.” in front of his name doesn’t mean he can’t be wrong, and he has on several occasions. HE IS HUMAN JUST LIKE ME! The point I am making is that all too often people blindly follow the “professionals” without checking with their own brain first as to whether what that “professional” is saying fits within their own common sense and experience in life. They “need” someone to tell them how to think simply because they are too lazy to think for themselves. “Professionals” have been wrong in the past and continue to make mistakes now. THEY ARE HUMAN JUST LIKE YOU! Use your own brain and judgement. If you feel school is best for your child because you have THOUGHT about it and came to that conclusion, then fine, more power to you, but what is good for one person isn’t necessarily good for another.