In an earlier post, I had mentioned hosting a book discussion on Dr. Milton Gaither’s book, Homeschool: An American History and we shall finally get started with that.
Circle Reader, who knows much more about this sort of thing than I, suggested bringing out some broad themes rather than going through the book chapter by chapter, but there really are eight themes, neatly organized into eight chapters. Since the central thesis is that homeschooling has meant different things in our culture at different times, it seems only logical to me to look at each of these trends on their own. Which means one chapter at a time.
I have decided I will put up a chapter summary over the weekend, and then respond with my thoughts the following Friday, along with links to all other participating blogs. It could get interesting when we get to the modern history of homeschooling. Hopefully those I have spoken with thus far who have objected to his portrayal of these events will have time to contribute to the discussion. They have thus far been on the so-called “open communion” side, but then I haven’t talked to anyone who would be considered a “closed communion homeschooler,” has read the book and has been homeschooling long enough to remember any of these events. When I read the book the first time, I knew no one would likely be particularly happy with the portrayal, but we’ll see where that discussion leads, I guess.
Barring the unforeseen, here is the plan for the next few weeks:
Week of August 17: The Family State, 1600-1776
Week of August 24: The Family Nation, 1776-1860
Week of August 30: The Eclipse of the Fireside, 1865-1930
Week of September 7: Why Homeschooling Happened, 1945-1990
Week of September 14: Three Homeschooling Pioneers
Week of September 21: The Changing of the Guard, 1983-1998
Week of September 28: Making it Legal
Week of October 5: Homeschooling and the Return of Domestic Education, 1998-2008
I am looking forward to reading your thoughts and reactions to the book! You can also listen to my interview with Dr. Gaither on my radio show. The interview starts about half way through the program.
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! 
Yikes, I’m behind. I meant to order this book but just haven’t had the time to do so. I’m going to be placing an order on Amazon soon, hopefully it won’t be before this is too far into the discussion to participate.
You should have time.
And you can always jump in late.
Fantastic, Dana! A busy month for me, but happily so.
You may find that the earlier history bumps up against the present quite a lot, and that the early chapters, too, may spark some interesting talk.
I’m lookig forward to this…I still haven’t found time to listen to the show yet, but I’m eager to since the topic sounds so interesting.
“Closed communion” and “open communion” homeschoolers — does this refer to the recent internet discussions on “Christian vs. inclusive” homeschooling? If so, I like the terminology; it is very descriptive, but maybe it resonates for me because I belong to a “closed communion” church body and as the topic is sometimes a touchy one, the parallel is quite poignant.
Yes, “closed communion” refers to those who require a statement of faith or something similar and exclude others while “open communion” refers to those groups which accept anyone regardless of faith, etc.
Dana,
An interesting thread for a show might be homeschool groups who are closed communion about only accepting inclusive homeschoolers. I realize that may take reading once or twice.
For a while in the DC area, I was on an email list for homeschooling that initially required members to be members of a homeschool group that was specifically inclusive.
They did eventually change the requirements for the email list to individual members being tolerant and respectful of other viewpoints. But I did find the initial requirement to be an interesting reaction.
Anyway, I really came here to ask if you could post ways of getting the show onto an ipod. I’m much more likely to listen while cleaning than sit at the computer to listen. I didn’t find it on iTunes yet. Is the show downloadable or only playable as streaming audio?
I didn’t have to read that twice, if it is any consolation to you.
And to be honest, as much as I like the idea of inclusive homeschool groups, I’ve never really felt welcome among them. I always feel like I need to guard what I say, and swallow a lot of “Christian bashing.” Of course, most of the inclusive groups I’ve had contact with are strictly via the Internet, and discussion there takes a little different form than among people you actually know and see once in awhile.
The show is downloadable. My dad downloads it to his MP3, so I know you can do it. I will check specifically on IPod. Some of the shows are available on Itunes, but not mine, yet. I think that is something that is being developed, but at the moment I think only the bigger shows are on it.
Hmm-I am uncomfortable with the terminology. Among Christian denominations, both “closed communion” and “open communion” (my background) have very specific, positive meanings, and affirm a common commitment among those to whom the term applies. With home education, does “open communion” mean anything beyond, “We’re not those folks?” If one group is “faith-centered,” would you want to call the other group “learner centered?”
Evocative as they are, the terms seem to frame the difference unevenly, somehow, on footing that assumes ideology, rather than educational integrity, is the most important thing. This is, of course, the point at issue. Broadening that point of contention out to a general classification scheme could lead us astray.
I wonder what we are missing or obfuscating by using terminology borrowed from doctrinal debates? Is this situation really a doctrinal one for all homeschoolers? (I think it may be so, if we include our convictions about the nature and purpose of education as “doctrine.”) What is the difference between a “closed communion” homeschool group (we are enthusiastic members of a couple of those) and “closed communion” homeschooling as a practice of cultural isolation / separation (to which our family would be strongly opposed)? Can “open communion” homeschoolers feel free to engage with their religious convictions (Christian or otherwise) in the context of an open group that may not share those convictions? Or do they have to keep so-called “non-academic” issues fenced inside one “closed” group or another? Can a “closed communion” homeschooler get handwriting tips from a pagan mom? If open vs. closed is the defining issue for specific organizations, but not for home educators as such, then what is at the heart of homeschooling? Does it have a single heart? If we didn’t use these terms, what would we use?
It may indeed reflect established social practice on the ground; but as with the term “homeschooling” itself, if we want to have the possibility of learning from and changing our homeschooling practices, I think we should be wary of how our terminology shapes our thinking.
When we started homeschooling, my wife would come home from meetings with our inclusive group in Chicago and say, “I just don’t know how all those people can be in the room with each other!”
She meant it as a compliment, and we think the answer is that they just practiced doing it regularly, and developed civil habits of mutual respect. We are very aware that the positive tone in that group was something special, since we’ve experienced the opposite from both non-religious and Christian homeschooling groups.
I disagree. Yes, the terms are borrowed from a theological point, but they are used a-theologically in an attempt to get away from “exclusivist” and “inclusivist” which inherently place a value judgment on those who exclude on whatever basis. And away from “Christian” and “secular” which isn’t accurate.
And I don’t think homeschooling has a single heart. We homeschool for very different reasons…and I don’t think the terminology is shaping thought so much as attempting to label something we all see in homeschooling as two somewhat opposing camps, but isn’t easy to distinguish.
The thing is, I don’t really think we need to have a single heart, nor necessarily get together and assist each other with the daily aspects of homeschooling. People should feel free to organize themselves into groups based on any common conviction, whether it be strictly “homeschooling” or a complete statement of faith. For me, the question isn’t really that relevant when we are talking about the local support group meeting in the basement of the local church and starts with prayer vs. the one that meets at McDonald’s and has as one of its rules that no one speaks of religious matters.
For me, the issue becomes important when we are talking about statewide organizations. These are the groups contacting legislators and providing the initial information when new laws are being proposed. So far as I know, here in Nebraska, the closed communion Christian statewide organization is all that there is. I don’t have any real issues with them related to their closed communionness, because so far as I can tell their beliefs line up with mine well enough. Not that I’ve spent all that much time researching their stances, or anything, and I’ve never attended their conventions, but should they be the only ones working with the legislature?
But then, it isn’t really their fault, I don’t think, that no other groups have been organized to date. According to the state, there are less than 6,000 homeschoolers in NE…not a lot to draw from for starting statewide organizations.
I think that a lot of the heartache over groups that place a qualification on membership, be it religious/philosophical, pedigogical or topical, is the sense of exclusion that some families feel on a wider level, especially if there aren’t other support alternatives.
It’s one thing to say that a group of like minded moms are going to have a women’s Bible study while there kids practice Spanish or that there is a book sale that promotes secular titles and attachment parenting works. It is perceived differently when the homeschool swim lessons or band or science fair are organized by (and only open to) a restrictive group.
This is not to say that restrictive groups are bad. It is to say that it is worth considering the purpose of the restrictions and if all activities need to be governed by the restriction.
Yes! And I’d argue that participating with each other in the day-to-day, as much as possible, and with conscious respect for areas of “non-communion,” is a strong foundation for developing respect from the larger society and increasing our capacity for constructive action at the state and national level.
But that’s a hard dance to do, if you want to raise kids “unstained by the world,” so closed groups provide some shelter from the dangers and challenges of dealing with outsiders.
On the other hand, it is really hard to organize a group that has “open” membership and still has passionate, active participants. So it’s no wonder that groups tend to close themselves one way or another…
It is a difficult balance. And I think that is part of why the “closed communion” model seems to have become what it is and as influential as it is. There is a whole worldview unifying participants rather than “just” homeschooling. And then their political activity, should there be any, also goes beyond “just” homeschooling.