Note: Please join me at 1PM CST today for Home School Talk! (The show will be available for download after the broadcast and my notes are now available).
HSLDA has an interesting op-ed out in the Washington Times which I have come back to in my thoughts numerous times since I first read it last week. In a way, it is a nice little essay about how we should thank the “homeschooling pioneers” for the liberties we enjoy today. It is always interesting to look back to the beginnings of a thought, an idea, a movement to see where it came from and understand how it became what it is. History, being the story of ourselves, is also somewhat subjective and we can see a lot of how we view ourselves in the histories we write.
The first thing which struck me as I read the essay was the presentation of the two homeschool pioneers mentioned in the essay: John Holt and Raymond Moore. But were they really “pioneers?”
pi·o·neer, n
1. One who ventures into unknown or unclaimed territory to settle.
John Holt was attempting to reform education. He met with little success in public school and not much more in the private schools where he taught. So in one of his writings, he sort of mused about an “Underground Railroad” to assist children in escaping the system, whether or not it were legal. Sensing a potential kindred spirit, letters began pouring in from homeschooling families across the nation and Holt dedicated the rest of his life to this work. Was he the pioneer? Or were those families who first chose to remove their children from the school system, not knowing what the eventual consequences would be? This is in no way meant to belittle the impact Holt had on homeschooling, but he seems to me to have been more thrust into a position of leadership of a movement that was already a growing force in America.
The Moores had a more developed homeschool philosophy, committed to keeping children (and especially boys) home until they were eight. But even they did not really begin looking seriously at homeschooling as solid pedagogy for older children until they saw just how many people were successfully doing exactly that in their homes.
Personally, I like to think of the homeschool “movement” led by those who simply chose to go a different route, sometimes never having heard of “homeschooling” before and certainly never having read any books on the subject. Movements start with individuals, and not necessarily always with individuals who already have a public presence. Every day people living out their convictions can and do have an impact on their communities.
But then there is that homeschool pioneer here in Nebraska who is often referred to, but seldom by name. Perhaps that is a fluke of where and when I have heard the inspirational speech about the standoff between a little church not too far from here and local law enforcement, leaving church members holed up in their church for days. Church doors being chained shut. Fathers being arrested. Mothers fleeing the state with their children. Plans to get children across state lines should authorities arrive.
What kind of person looks at a plan to get their child across state lines in the event the state should become aware of their activities and then goes ahead and pulls their child from school and enrolls them in this little unaccredited school in the basement of a church? Even today, I might just go ahead and walk down to our local school and enroll my children. I am committed to homeschooling, but I’m not sure if I am that committed.
But I also have a hard time saying I am thankful to these pioneers. They certainly brought the attention to Nebraska, and prompted the governor to declare it “embarrassing” to have the state engaged in this battle with churches. Their conflict led to the ability to file for a religious exemption, allowing for the operation of unaccredited private schools and hence homeschools. This was later expanded to include philosophical objections as well. But little is said about what was actually being taught in the basement of that church which sparked all the controversy. It took some time for me to dig up his name which does not even appear on the Nebraska Christian Home Educators Association website’s history of homeschooling in Nebraska. But the famous pastor of that little church in Louisville, Nebraska was none other than the Reverend Everett Sileven. And some of his choice teachings?
“Other races are not gifted with the tools of nature to be industrious developers of agriculture, industry, civilizations, governments, etc. as Adam was so gifted. … Though the non-white races had inhabited the earth for many centuries before Adam, the world stayed in its non-developed stage until Adam came on the scene. … God in His sovereign grace created another race, `man’ (Adamites), white for effect, and created another section in him (Adam) beyond the body and soul of the other animals and races. Adam has a third section, called the human spirit. It was in this spirit of man that God himself would dwell” (Everett Ramsey, Multiculturalism: Racemixing–The Sin for Which God Will Kill, America Today Publishers, 1994, p. 9). (Pastor Sileven changed his name to Ramsey)
An interesting place for his name to appear: Archive of Extremist Events by State, 2006. And a little more about this organization he is attached to. Forgive me if I am a little leery of actually thanking him, or his philosophical counterparts for their part in the homeschool movement. But they appear to still be out there, “mingling among us,” so to speak, as evidenced by some odd comments which popped up over at Spunky’s blog. And while race has certainly never entered into these discussions, conspiracy theories abound in the discussions I have had with other homeschoolers. I presume they have differing origins, but the Christian Identity movement certainly seems to have its influence in a number of places.
But it makes me curious. Is Nebraska’s history unique? Or just what were the teachings of those first homeschoolers in your state who stood firm despite what may have seemed like an inevitable conflict with the state?
FWIW my husband went to public school in a poor area of Cincinnati and there were racial fights all the time. Unfortunately when there is a “race war” on all the time, your very colour precludes you from being neutral. We did not want to live in that neighbourhood with our children, ever. Maybe now we live in an area with just 4% other races and have isolated ourselves, but you know what? We can at least be friends *here* with the four percent of the people who are different from us.
It’s a good point that the ‘extremists’ are the ones bucking the system… I don’t buy into the FLDS theology, but I can sympathize with their plight, etc.
I don’t know what I’d do if homeschooling were illegal. I try not to think about it, and would probably link arms with these extremists before sending Elf back to ps to be locked in the closet.
Dana, these are all great things to think about and I hope to be able to hear the broadcast WHILE it’s going on. I seem to be able to listen to it only afterward. :]
For those, like me, who had no idea what “Christian Identity movement” meant:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/cr_ident.htm
The term “Christian Identity” has two distinct meanings:
bullet Anglo-Israelism (a.k.a. British-Israelism): A theological belief that the Anglo-Saxon, Celtic, Scandinavian, Germanic and associated cultures are the racial descendents of the tribes of Israel. Thus, by extension, Americans and Canadians, are composed of the descendents of the ancient Israelites of the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament).
bullet Racist, Christian-based faith groups: A number of small, extremely conservative Fundamentalist Christian denominations which have accepted Anglo-Israelism, and grafted it to racist, sexist, anti-communist and homophobic beliefs. They view the Jewish people as descendants of Satan. Followers tend to be involved in political movements opposing gun control, equal rights to gays and lesbians, and militia movements.
The second meaning has become dominant in the U.S. and Canada. We will use it for the remainder of this essay.
****
And, hurray, they homeschool too? And I’m supposed to thank these asshats? No thanks.
Hats off to innovators who took a chance. No credit to those who pander for continuing pats on the back. Things have changed in hsing-land and continue to change. And that’s a good thing.
Hoping to hear your show later, Dana. I remembered too late last time. Sigh. . . Maybe I’ll be able to hear the last show in archives. Off to check.
Nance
It all goes back to the basic question of what kind of person stands up to the system at all costs. It also makes sense of some things which just don’t seem to fit when I read of them. I’m not sure how to put this, and I’m sure it is as affected by my own views of Christianity and how I believe we are to deal with those in authority over us and persecution in general. And don’t get me wrong…I certainly don’t think we cannot stand up for rights and all that. But there is a certain fervor to the early conflicts which seems out of place from adherents to a religion which stresses obedience to civil authority, humility, meekness and self-control.
HSLDA points to the step away from prayer in schools, the bible in the classroom and the teaching of evolution for the reason behind the Christian “exodus” from public schools. Unfortunately, there was something else going on at the time which seems to have ignited at least a few passions as well: racial integration.
The actual numbers of the Christian Identity “movement” are extra-ordinarily small. I think I read about 25 to 50 thousand. How to deal with such groups? They are illegal and strictly controlled in Germany (not CI, per se, but the various neo-nazi organizations). It hasn’t seemed to help much, and the state goes far enough to make all related symbols illegal, even if they are used as part of a display against neo-Nazis.
Honestly, I think about the most effective weapon against these groups is to let them go, monitoring their activities as much as is legally possible. I don’t think there would be anything like watching a KKK parade to strike at most people’s conscience. And as can be noted in the chart linked in the entry, these groups are already being monitored.
As I was reading more about them last night, it struck me how many organizations their members have leadership positions in yet they don’t directly infuse their racial teachings into it. That is why I was wondering just how much influence they really have. Conspiracy theories intrigue me for some reason, but I’m never sure what to make of them. I read one last night I liked, however. Alex Jones is part of the Illuminati, as an agent of disinformation. He is pretty high up in the shadow government, it seems.
Anyway, I can see why the NCHEA doesn’t necessarily want to name this pastor as a pioneer of homeschooling here in NE, but I also don’t think a recognition of this fact coupled with how much the movement has grown and changed since the ability to homeschool was firmly established reflects poorly on homeschoolers. Maybe dealing with some of these issues directly would help dispel some of the stereotypes associated with homeschooling. Maybe that is just wishful thinking.
Truly educational post Dana; you have me firing new neurons right and left — and coming from me that is a HUGE compliment!
Perhaps “spokespeople” would be a better word than “pioneers” for John Holt and Raymond Moore. Yes, the pioneers were the people who actually went against the tide by homeschooling their kids; but the movement may have never gotten off the ground without people like these 2 gentlemen who were so articulate about the why’s and wherefore’s of homeschooling. I love them both!
Yes, I think spokes people is a good descriptive term. I love them both, too. But I am equally as fascinated by this first people who just pulled their children. My own thoughts are sort of developing in this area, but it is interesting to look through what motivated them.
Nance, thanks for enlightening us as to what the Christian Identity movement is. I had no idea and was going to ask.
And thanks for the homework, Dana. I have seen various articles about the beginnings of the homeschool movement here in Texas, but I’ve never looked into the topic.
At a homeschool convention, I remember someone speaking about the process they went through after removing their children from the public school system. It was a difficult battle, but in the end it was endorsed by the governing agencies. Wish I could remember who it was…I’ll have to look for my notes.
Thanks, Renae! I am curious about this, but I also suspect that some of these people who made waves in the media were not necessarily representative.
How many people homeschooling or operating unaccredited private schools in NE at the time did not attract attention? And how many of them only heard of Sileven through the media?
I often think of the Cox’s here in California, but then I know very little about the actual begins of home education as the begins is how education took place before public education.
Maybe we should be looking at who stood their ground when public schooling was being enforced and pulling children from their families? Maybe it was not a movement at all, rather a retaining of the status quo from decades passed **shrug**
Back in 2006, a local paper ran a 4 part series looking at the Virginia religious exemption to the compulsory attendance statute. The RE allows families with “bona fide religious beliefs” to be completely exempt (no annual filing or evidence of progress requirements). There is some question of the constitutionality of it, because there is no philosophical exemption (in fact the RE statute specifically prohibits “essentially political, sociological or philosophical views or a merely personal moral code.”) You can read more about the RE here:
http://www.vahomeschoolers.org/guide/religious_exemption.asp
The paper found that the RE statute has its roots in anti-integration efforts fighting desegregation of Virginia schools:
http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2006/042006/04162006/183623
For a local paper, the articles were very well researched (I learned some things!) To the reporters credit, she talked to both HSLDA and VaHomeschoolers (Va’s inclusive statewide homeschool org). The articles highlighted some issues that could be worrisome (school officials were quoted as saying they really did not know what happens to RE kids and that their hands were tied because they were not comfortable making a judgment about a family’s religious beliefs). We were a little worried about potential fall out (the paper asked the question: Is it time for the RE to be revisited?) but nothing came of it.
I was re-reading the Fredericksburg articles and thought that you would enjoy reading this one Dana…it specifically talks about the Virginia pioneers.
Basically the home instruction statute came into being because many years ago, the only way to “legally” homeschool was the Religious exemption. However, in the 1970s, parents started suing the school boards over denied REs. So in 1984, the state legislature enacted the home instruction statute (which had filing and evidence of progress requirements).
Is State or Family Responsible for Ensuring the Child’s Education
http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2006/042006/04162006/155546/index_html?page=2
“spokespeople” ?????????????????????????
Stephanie, I have often wondered if that is why some groups stick so adamantly to the religious basis for homeschooling. It came up in our hearings here but the argument seemed to fall on deaf ears…but I think there persists a perception that if you can build your case on religious grounds, the state can’t interfere and you can claim first amendment protection. Our law began as a strictly religious exemption as well, but that changed in the late 80s.
And there does seem to be some evidence that the resistance to racial integration was a stronger motivator than the prayer, bible and evolution issues. I haven’t looked into it that much at this point, but it seems that the changing laws pushed a lot of people to private schools (perhaps saving them after they began failing in the 70s?) but when integration was being pushed on them as well, people began homeschooling.
Thank you for the links. I’ll take a look at them later!
Here’s another approach –
In several threads we’re discussing cognitive science and how the “framing” of political ideas can literally change our minds and our brains, what we’re able to think and see or not. This applies to home education framing too, in our own minds and in the public mind.
I’ve almost finished this new book in which we learn that “empathy” is a physical, neuron-based reality inside human brains that is inseparably wired to our rational “reasoning” — yet because we didn’t discover that until the last decade or so, human empathy is framed out of our political ideas and analysis in favor of facts, numbers, budget and balance sheets, etc.
The author’s main point, I think, is that we each need to take charge of our own thinking by learning about how it really works, make frames explicit so we can learn to avoid falling into various frame traps that otherwise will subconsciously drive our political opinions without license.
Last night I read that the One Big Frame subconsciously interfering with our clear thinking on every issue is “obedience to authority” and respect for the immutable moral pecking order, or what he calls “strict father” framing.
He explains that politically conservative brains generally, tend to connect every issue to the narrative of making people work hard, submit unquestioningly not just to “discipline” but even to suffering and painful punishment that’s “good for them” so they can be righteously taught and trained, and eventually earn some freedom and prosperity for their obedience to authority and dutiful service.
Even the Constitution itself requires “strictness” in this frame of mind!
Also, doesn’t it explain a whole lot about Historical School?? . . .and it probably explains most of the muddle about homeschool history. It seems pretty clear that there were competing frames of thought about everything that happened!
“Obedience to authority” was the mainframe when we started homeschooling in Florida — there was only one statewide group you were told to join and it “governed” homeschool parents like the PTA only worse, almost as if it were a state agency, rule-based with elected officers and a handbook, imposing penalties and rewards to shape behavior, judging and recording relative compliance so the “bad apples” could be weeded out before they hurt the rest of us, etc. Heck, they weren’t bravely standing up to the system, they WERE the system!
I questioned everything and everyone (becoming the skunk at plenty of park days and legislative strategy planning sessions) and kept thinking about it myself. It still seems literally crazy to me, to work this hard for each family’s unfettered diverse choices, and then to replace the school board with the homeschool board, so to speak . . .maybe framing really does explain a lot?
From an earlier blogpost, another example of this strict father authority meme in both school and homeschool history?
Sorry – try <a href=”http://cockingasnook.wordpress.com/2007/03/08/ye-olde-deluder-satan-wants-our-kids/”Ye Olde Deluder Satan Wants Our Kids”
Wish I could still edit comments, but hopefully this will work this time:
Ye Olde Deluder Satan Wants Our Kids
And I disagree with your author’s description of the conservative mindset. I think he has fallen for what seems to be a rather typical “framing” of the issue…a basic assumption that something is “wrong” with conservatives and all that is necessary is a little retraining to make us all alright. I actually find this trend a little disturbing.
It is also here, in a flawed research study at UCLA. Especially in the interpretation everyone seemed so inclined to jump on…that conservatives just can’t handle new ideas. But a more scientific analysis of the research methods is available here.
Thomas Frank, in his book “What’s the Matter With Kansas?” accuses us of failing to make “certain mental connections about the world.”
After the last election, a headline in a British paper read “How can 59 million people be so dumb?” And, as Denis Boyle’s describes in “Superior, Nebraska,”
(p. 15)
Dr. James Wilson shares an interesting speech he gave at Harvard that I am more inclined to agree with.
He supports the war in Iraq and would like to see a more united front which seems to be the motivation for the speech, but I think his analysis of the political situation is quite accurate and at least reflects my observations.
And one problem with your author’s assertions regarding authority seems to be the fact that so many conservatives resist the authority of the government. I suppose you could argue they are appealing to a higher authority in the Constitution or the Bible, but that doesn’t really satisfy me.
If I were to make sweeping generalizations about the differences between conservatives and liberals, it would be that conservatives tend to believe in individual responsibility and some variation of a sin-nature while liberals tend to believe in more social responsibility and in some variation of the perfectability of man through improved socio-economic factors.
Neither philosophy is a result of a moral, intellectual, cultural, mental, etc. defect. They are simply separate and distinct philosophical stances.
Oops…forgot the source attribution for the above quote. It is available here:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/federation/feature/?id=110007966
I think there is a wide cross section of society homeschooling, and I think there are a lot of people who just thrive on conflict and confrontation. If they weren’t in your face about homeschooling, it would be something else. And no, I don’t want them speaking for me (or getting all the credit for homeschooling) either. The movement, if you can call it that, has not been aligned with only one segment of our culture…..though it seems so much easier to color us all with one brush.
Rose, I agree. It bugs me that the media seems to like to pick certain “types” of people for their articles, but then at the same time, they are generally the people shouting the loudest and the easiest to get a quote from. Conveniently shocking enough to get people to read the article, as well.
Should the Israelis give up their military superiority because you think being militarily superior is a moral shortcoming? ,