I just finished reading an interesting entry over at Home Education Magazine that I’m still trying to process. It touches on a lot of things I have been thinking on recently, and contains some themes I shall likely come back to.
With the 2008 elections, there has been a rearranging of the political landscape in this country, and a shift of power is in the offing, as suggested in the article by Kathleen Parker. The challenge for us as homeschooling families and advocates has always been how to keep homeschooling from being aligned with a specific ideology, and understanding why that is important, and what effect it will have on our ability to continue to protect, defend, and expand our homeschooling freedoms, and those of our children and grandchildren.
And I agree with that to an extent. But there is a serious problem with this view as well: Education is inherently political. So-called fundamentalists may be seeking to “raise up a generation,” “take back America,” or “reclaim the culture,” and view homeschooling as part of the salvation of America. But the modern homeschool movement also finds its beginnings with equally zealous adherents to a particular worldview with goals of social transformation and it wasn’t Christian. And the public schools? I may disagree with the goals of Paulo Freire, but he, too, recognized the political significance of education.
Since education is by nature social, historical and political, there is no way we can talk about some universal, unchanging role for the teacher…It is my basic conviction that a teacher must be fully cognizant of the political nature of his/her practice and assume responsibility for this rather than denying it. Quoted in Advocacy Research in Education, p. 30-31
In fact, many of those for whom HEM expresses the most concern are responding directly to the politics of education present in the public schools when they choose to homeschool, going so far as to call on fellow Christians to “Rescue [our] children from Caesar.”
And while I empathize with her concern for Esquire’s view of homeschooling, I think she gives far too much power to HSLDA, and ignores Esquire’s obviously biased and rather emotionally charged language which is rarely the result of serious contemplation.
Salted throughout the vast bureaucracy are dozens of little homeschooled land mines, the products of a dozen cheapjack diploma mills selling patent-medicine history to the spiritually gullible. Esquire (emphasis mine)
The fact is, many on the left and right cannot fathom that any intelligent person could, on their own, come to any conclusion about what is best for the world and for America that disagrees with their own view. The right blames our failures on the public school system and the media, claiming continually that America has been led astray through indoctrination. The left views us the same way, but it is our supposed patriarchic family structure, our churches and our homeschooling that they focus on, hence the focus on liberating our children through public education. Very few truly respect differing opinions, honest debate, and varying worldviews. If you don’t agree with me, it is because you have been indoctrinated by x,y,z.
The picture of homeschooled minions is just one addition to the rather tired meme begun by Thomas Frank in his “What’s the Matter with Kansas.” Too many people out there just disagree with the noble and obviously superior liberal ideology, so something must be wrong with us. Must be the homeschoolers.
And unfortunately, I think Helen may be a little guilty of this as well. However, she doesn’t blame homeschoolers, but HSLDA.
Homeschooling families were turned into pawns in a political chess game; how often did we hear chest-thumping claims from HSLDA about how many homeschoolers they could call into action?
But are these families really “pawns in a political chess game?” The vast majority of Christian homeschooling families I talk to who forward me the HSLDA e-lerts and repost them to their blogs are far from pawns in the political process. They are intelligent, passionate and engaged. They know what they believe and why they believe it. They have strong convictions, and by and large those convictions line up with HSLDA’s overall agenda.
I do not think the discussion is adequately furthered by viewing the thousands of families thus organized as “indoctrinated” or as “pawns” in a “game.”
As much as I respect HEM and Helen, and as often as I have disagreed with HSLDA, I am always suspicious of anyone’s claim that their rights are somehow endangered by the free expression of the rights of others. The solution is not to be found in silencing those homeschoolers with whom we disagree, in distancing ourselves and “the homeschool movement” from particular factions within it, nor in positioning every point of disagreement as somehow endangering our freedoms to homeschool.
Somewhere in the debate, we have to realize that how people view us has more to do with them than it does with us. We need to accept the fact that we are a poorly understood social phenomenon. That our numbers are now large enough that we are going to gain national attention regardless of what we say or how we say it. That people tend to deal with new and unfamiliar information by categorizing and hence stereotyping.
Or to be more direct, does this picture have more to say about blacks or the whites who furthered the stereotypes?
Heh, I gave up tweeting on this. Home schoolers out rank public schoolers consistently. Matter of fact in Washington the top 10% of the scores are held almost exclusively by home school students. Here in Idaho we have taken one ITBS so far and my son scored above and beyond the public school students, and here I was dreading a low score. LOL!
HSLDA is a safe guard since it happens all the time where the school teachers and staff don’t know the law. Yes I had a little run it with them myself as to them not needing all the details on my kids and whether I was qualified to teach. It’s not necessary for them to know in Washington. It’s called a trust system DUH! You bet the next year the gal had to tell everyone it wasn’t necessary to put down our recommendations or if there was going to be a tutor. I still had to prod her “Oh? Last year you wanted that information”. Mean aren’t I? So she had to say it out loud. “It’s not required by law”. BWA HAHAHAHAHA! That felt so good.
So if you can do register for HSLDA. You never know.
Interesting commentary and critique, Dana. I’d like to address a couple of your points.
You wrote: “…the modern homeschool movement also finds its beginnings with equally zealous adherents to a particular worldview with goals of social transformation and it wasn’t Christian.”
I’m not sure who you’re referring to here, unless it was John Holt’s interest in the United World Federalists, now the World Federalist Movement? Or were you thinking of someone else?
You wrote: “…while I empathize with her concern for Esquire’s view of homeschooling, I think she gives far too much power to HSLDA, and ignores Esquire’s obviously biased and rather emotionally charged language…”
Again, I’m not sure what you mean here by “gives far too much power to HSLDA,” or in your statement that I “…ignored Esquire’s… language…” How did I “ignore” it by bringing it to our readers’ attention? I didn’t see a single mention of it elsewhere before I referenced it (perhaps my searches were flawed?), so wasn’t everyone else actually doing the “ignoring” of it? I’m confused.
I totally agree with your observation: “Very few truly respect differing opinions, honest debate, and varying worldviews.” If you’ve read my writing for any length of time you should be aware that I’ve always tried to bring those qualities to the table, sometimes managing to do so, other times falling short. But I value them greatly, and if you can see ways I can improve my writing in that direction, please advise. Trying to understand your points above is an attempt to respect your differing opinion and engage in honest conversation (I wouldn’t call this a debate).
You wrote: “As much as I respect HEM and Helen, and as often as I have disagreed with HSLDA, I am always suspicious of anyone’s claim that their rights are somehow endangered by the free expression of the rights of others.”
Again, I agree with you, in principle. I have a lot of trouble with that “free expression of the rights of others” part though, as I see HSLDA’s actions moving in quite the opposite direction. It took us many years to understand what HSLDA was doing, and how they were doing it, and why. I’ve come to accept that their actions are simply not going to cause concern for many people, particularly those who have not made a critical study of their legal/political actions over the years, and when people see no reason for concern they generally have no patience for what they perceive as undue criticism.
You note where the solution is not to be found, and on one level I agree with your analysis, but if you understand the long-stated theocratic goals and agenda of HSLDA, can you explain where you see a solution might be?
Great thoughts, Dana. I agree 100%.
Re: zealous adherents to a particular worldview I’m predominantly to the “hippies” and those who were partaking in a social revolution. Christians weren’t the only ones, and they seem to have come on a bit later. The main point is that education is inherently political and it is difficult to separate the two.
“…while I empathize with her concern for Esquire’s view of homeschooling, I think she gives far too much power to HSLDA, and ignores Esquire’s obviously biased and rather emotionally charged language…”
Sorry to be unclear. You seem to treat Esquire’s comment as if it were perfectly rational and as if somehow their opinion of homeschooling would be different if only it weren’t for HSLDA. I’m not so sure. You say it is a “direct legacy of those businesses and individuals outlined in ‘Homeschooling Freedoms at Risk’” but I remain unconvinced. This is how my views are frequently portrayed, and I doubt it has much to do with HSLDA.
A lot of us are conservative and Christian and homeschooling is frequently supported and encouraged in our churches. How are you going to separate this from homeschooling, when so many of us homeschool for these very reasons? I like the idea of inclusive groups, but I am yet to find one I feel comfortable in. There are times when we can obviously work together, but I know that I never did feel particularly welcome on the HEM yahoo group and really have never got along any better in any inclusive group because most of them I’ve been associated with thus far seem to have a continuing anti-Christian subtext.
You say HSLDA has theocratic goals, but do they differ so greatly from the bulk of their membership? These views started more with Rushdooney and were present in some of the earliest Christian homeschooling packets before HSLDA was even on the scene and before Vicki Farris first thought about homeschooling but was afraid her husband wouldn’t go for it.
I have read quite a bit about what you are referring to, and particularly the early presentations about how homeschool groups should be exclusive, driving a wedge between groups who only a few years earlier were working together quite happily to secure their freedom to homeschool.
But I’m not convinced that this split would not have come about had HSLDA never entered the scene. The obvious philosophical differences can only be set aside so long as there is a continued and perceived threat to things we see as more important. I honestly do believe that a lot of the division we see today is actually a result of the established liberty we all share. When there is a real threat, we seem to be able to set aside our differences quickly enough. The rest of the time, we boycott everyone and everything, whether it is Subway and ABC, or blog networks, blog awards and blog carnivals.
And what is the solution? What if there isn’t one? What if we, like every other minority group in America, just have to deal with the fact that the majority doesn’t quite get it? That we are likely to always be stereotyped?
Or maybe there is one. And maybe it doesn’t really rest on controlling how anyone perceives us, or how anyone expresses themselves as homeschoolers in the political sphere. I was actually rather encouraged by Ann Zeise and Tammy Takahashi’s recounting of what happened in California during that whole mess. Another homeschooler here in NE had the opportunity to talk to a Democrat running for office for over half an hour. He admitted being completely ignorant of homeschooling, asked a lot of questions and at the end of it seemed rather supportive…more so than what we had gotten out of the Republican running for the same seat.
We seem to have made pretty decent headway amongst Republicans and conservatives, with a fair percentage of them viewing homeschooling positively. Liberals don’t seem as open to it, but maybe that is something liberal homeschoolers need to work on.
“If you don’t agree with me, it is because you have been indoctrinated by x,y,z.”
Oh my, that is absolutely the mentality. Well said.
~Luke
“Liberals don’t seem as open to it, but maybe that is something liberal homeschoolers need to work on.”
Hey, I’ve been TRYING!
That’s what my blogging at the very liberal, and mostly homeschooler-hostile, Culture Kitchen was all about from the start. That’s been my mission the past few years.
Here’s one example, New Walks, New Talks, Tetrapods and the Gospel of Judas — they’re all like this, because imo to actually reach folks instead of scolding or shouting at them, you tell them stories in their native language:
As a liberal homeschooler, I just try to stay out of the fray. Let me to my business and I will leave you to yours. When attacked, we come together quite well Why is label and identity so important–in regards to education or any other grouping? Don’t our actions and inaction say more about us.
Personally I don’t belong to a group, I don’t fit well into one specific type of homeschooling–I am not a Christian homeschooler, although I am Christian, and I am not a secular homeschooler, although I don’t use religion in any of my homeschooling… other than as a philosophical discussion when my child is seeking, inquiring.
It seems everything is political these days. And for what purpose?
Followed some links and returned…
I find it more than a little annoying when I see blog posts in which the author seems to portray him/herself as “not like those other homeschoolers.” It reinforces any stereotypes people who don’t homeschool may have. I mean, I’m not a homeschooler like THAT. :p
In terms of the absolute number of individuals in the U.S. holding diplomas that are in essence worthless as a guarantee of that person’s academic skills, the government-run schools beat homeschooling hands-down. I also suspect that the percentage of illiterate and innumerate high school graduates is far higher among those who attended government-run schools than those who were homeschooled.
I have been trying to put words to my thoughts on this all morning. It’s hard. No one wants to be labeled, and yet in order to identify yourself, or even to defend yourself you almost have to label yourself.
I am a Christian. Shoot, I imagine I could very well be termed a fundamentalist. I refuse to separate being a follower of Christ from any part of my life, including homeschooling and politics.
I think the sentiment on the part of so-called liberal, or secular homeschoolers, to separate what they do at home from the political arena is part of the problem.
They would vote for people who would be too happy to regulate or even eliminate homeschooling.
I can only speak for the history of homeschooling in Texas and really I can’t even do that with 100% authority. In the ’80’s when homeschoolers were being prosecuted by the TEA in large numbers, it was Christians who banded together to bring a class-action suit to finally determine what the status of homeschooling in Texas was.
Only recently do I see secular legal defense organizations forming. I know this is in reaction to HSLDA. It’s a good thing. I hope that they spend time lobbying the liberal, pro-public school candidates they support on the legalities and benefits of homeschooling. Not just to the individual, but to society as well.
Good for you, JJ.
And I know you are. It is an issue I have considered posting on for awhile, but I’m not sure quite how I could say it. Anything I try to formulate comes out sounding like the way I hear those outside Christianity talking about patriarchy or any other teaching within Christianity. Mostly, they seem too distant from it to really understand the intricacies of the different movements and really appreciate how fundamentally unique each one is.
I’m not a liberal. And to borrow a bit from things you’ve written about the “power of story,” what is the “story” of the Democratic party or of liberalism? Is it antithetical to educational freedom? When I see the anti-institutional and anti-corporate side of liberalism, it is difficult for me to fathom exactly what about the institutional and somewhat corporate model of public education is seen as superior. When I read even Freire’s writings on the politics of education, and the need to construct knowledge rather than be passive receptors, I see an argument for homeschooling.
But I won’t make any inroads with that kind of argumentation. I’m the last person to tell anyone what they believe or should believe, and the conversation will progress further amongst those of similar beliefs. It is too easy to label me as another religious whacko with some ulterior motive.
Shawna, I’m a conservative Christian homeschooler who does homeschool “for religious reasons,” however when I see conservative Christian homeschooling portrayed in the media, my first thought is “that isn’t us.” I even voted for Bush…twice…but I’m hardly a homeschooled landmine waiting for his call to detonate.
These people do not know what they are talking about and thus it is too easy to fall into stereotyping. But it isn’t HSLDA’s job to enlighten them or provide them with research for their articles. It is their job of journalists to make more than one phone call and touch on more than one side of the story if they truly want to be journalists rather than editorialists.
Crimson Wife–Good point.
I’m always amused when people poke fun at homeschooling and the diploma signed by mom. The thing is, to go anywhere, that diploma alone isn’t generally enough. Many go ahead and take the GED just to avoid the whole issue, and a good many take the SAT or ACT. There is an independent measure to provide some balance to mom’s signature. Not counting the whole interview process.
Christy wrote: I think the sentiment on the part of so-called liberal, or secular homeschoolers, to separate what they do at home from the political arena is part of the problem.
They would vote for people who would be too happy to regulate or even eliminate homeschooling.
***
This may be your impression of liberal hsers but it is not accurate.
I want separation of church and state, that is true.
But the very values that I try to impart at home are the ones I want in our government — honesty, fairness, helping those in need, etc.
And I want all of that with absolutely no additional regulation of hsers.
I am only one liberal hser but I have yet to find others who want more regulation of hsing.
A point of agreement, perhaps?
Nance
Dana wrote: I’m not a liberal. And to borrow a bit from things you’ve written about the “power of story,” what is the “story” of the Democratic party or of liberalism? Is it antithetical to educational freedom? When I see the anti-institutional and anti-corporate side of liberalism, it is difficult for me to fathom exactly what about the institutional and somewhat corporate model of public education is seen as superior. When I read even Freire’s writings on the politics of education, and the need to construct knowledge rather than be passive receptors, I see an argument for homeschooling.
But I won’t make any inroads with that kind of argumentation. I’m the last person to tell anyone what they believe or should believe, and the conversation will progress further amongst those of similar beliefs. It is too easy to label me as another religious whacko with some ulterior motive.
********
There’s no need to argue. Just a need, I think, to acknowledge that, as hsers, we have chosen a different way to do the best we can for our children. We may think those kids in ps would be better off hsing (of course!
) but not everyone does.
And that doesn’t make them uncaring. It makes them parents who have chosen differently and/or don’t have much of a choice.
And that is the population that I think liberals care about when they insist that ps is a social good that should be available to all.
And I agree if that’s all you’ve got.
But it does get so lost in translation. It becomes babysitting and not much more. Or test-taking and pressure.
It is so ingrained in our society that most people can’t imagine it not being. And I don’t think it needs to go away. It needs to learn from hsing and do a better job.
When we get to this level of thinking about it, it’s important to remember that there is a difference between the Democratic Party and the school system itself and the actual families and what they want.
Republican policies are not always the best for the actual people involved either.
Pity the poor kids who have had to endure this NCLB era. Not that it’s over. But politics and business (publishers and testers have to looove NCLB) pushing one agenda for a while doesn’t change that the actual parents involved want good things for their children and know they are stuck with garbage much of the time. It doesn’t change that hsing is a fringe idea to most people even though it just makes your heart ache to see what kids have to go through at schools.
It’s a tangle and I wish there was more cross-pollination of ideas about learning — at least on the level of the families, even if the system itself never gets a clue.
Nance
“Republican policies are not always the best for the actual people involved either.”
I agree totally with that statement. However, and please correct me if I am wrong, but isn’t NCLB an example of bipartisanism at it’s finest? I thought Senator Kennedy helped to author that monstrosity.
Now, if the Libertarians ruled the land…
(Just kidding! Just kidding!)
Dana – are the kids running amuck with Mom voiceless? Hope you feel better!
I agree with this completely:
There’s no need to argue. Just a need, I think, to acknowledge that, as hsers, we have chosen a different way to do the best we can for our children. We may think those kids in ps would be better off hsing (of course!
) but not everyone does.
And I care about the public school system and don’t want to see its destruction, and I think that privatization is an unrealistic goal.
I wasn’t trying to equate Democrats or liberals with the public school system. I think the conservative’s hold on that goes further back in history. My point was actually the opposite…that being Democratic or liberal does not by default mean that you have to be for compulsory education of all students.
I believe most or all Christians would have an ungodly fit if one group of Christians began “informing” and “instructing” everybody else on what real Christianity was, just as a kindness you know, to keep things clear and to keep “real” Christianity safe, versus all the stuff being peddled under that name. . .
But in homeschooling, apparently, not so much.
LOTP — I suppose we can haggle about how “bipartisan” things ended up being. Does funding fall under the R label or the D label? In this case, I seem to remember terrific photo ops and then no funding from the R dominated Congress.
But, either way, the pol parties don’t often make decisions that seem to be good for the actual families trying to make the ps system work for them. They help the system continue but . . .
And I think that was my point. That neither party has much to brag about.
Nance
“.. .being Democratic or liberal does not by default mean that you have to be for compulsory education of all students.”
Exactly. It doesn’t even make sense, if you can get them to stop and think about it, as not fitting with their moral thinking generally.
The big problem though, comes when conservative Christian homeschoolers see that but then don’t see the same incompatibility between their fierce defense of private hsing as anything the family wants to make of it, and say, defending marriage by legislating or amending constitutions to limit other people’s ideas of how to live as families.
As long as each community of belief sees the splinter in the other side’s eye but ignores the mote in their own. . . well, you know.
Something we brought in to illuminate how the “other side” thinks is this short cognitive psychology video from TED lecture by Jonathan Haidt. Also the Political Compass which goes deeper than just liberal-conservative and looks at how we view authority, etc.
Dana, I think you’d really be able to put these findings and ideas to good use!
My point was actually the opposite…that being Democratic or liberal does not by default mean that you have to be for compulsory education of all students.
***
Ah, I see. This communication thing is tricky.
Nance
It is alright. I have lost my voice, and am semi-delirious. The pharmacy turned green today while I was signing for my daughter’s meds and I can’t wait to see what the doctor starts me on.
If I say something that makes no sense, please cut me a little slack.
And JJ, funny you should mention “real Christianity.” I’m pretty conservative, but have gotten my share of emails beginning with “You call yourself a Christian, yet…” Actually, about the same time you posted this, I was accused of causing unbelievers to stumble on my other blog.
“Somewhere in the debate, we have to realize that how people view us has more to do with them than it does with us.”
So true, great comment.
Except that many liberals who claim they want “separation of church and state” actually are in favor of government interference in the rights of religious believers to practice their faiths.
Just look at all the recent denials of religious exemptions to Christian-affiliated organizations or individuals. Catholic hospitals are being forced to provide the “Plan B” abortifacient pill. Catholic Charities has had to end its adoption services because they were being forced to place children with homosexual couples. A Christian physician was sued for refusing an elective fertility treatment to a lesbian. A Christian photographer was fined several thousand dollars for refusing to take pictures of a lesbian “wedding”. I could go on and on but you get the picture…
CS, we could argue each of these cases individually or question whether or not they actually happened.
Or I could stipulate that this sort of things happens. Liberals who want separation of church and state can be overly zealous in their pursuit of that goal.
I do so stipulate.
But the point of this discussion is not, I don’t think, to look to errors on the other side as an excuse not to engage.
So, we all want separation of church and state, right?
We may disagree with how that works out in individual cases but that’s a point of agreement. Isn’t it?
Nance
CW, not CS. Sorry.
Nance
“…neither party has much to brag about.”
I think that is a statement that liberals and conservatives can both rally behind.
Again, the Political Compass is so helpful to getting beyond the mental mashing of every world view into liberal versus conservative. It emphasizes degrees of “authoritarian” belief for both right and left and also libertarian belief for both right and left. And your social and economic politics can be more strongly one than the other, etc.
I’d be really interested to hear what some of Dana’s regular commenters discover about their own place on this political compass — I’m just guessing that Dana and CW and LOTP, for example, would get some room for personal nuance and difference between their world views with this instrument, rather than all being lumped together on one point of a liberal conservative scale that makes homeschoolers appear more homogeneous (or polarized) than we really are.
Adding that Nance and I did — got some room for personal difference, I mean, while also understanding better why our similarities are compatible.
What I want is the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
That means that the government should not favor any specific faith or faiths over others and should not interfere in the rights of believers to practice whatever faith they’ve chosen for themselves.
The Founding Fathers intended to prevent a national church from being set up, not to remove religion entirely from the public square. One can clearly see that by reading the account of the debate over its wording.
It also means religion has no place in determining government policy and law, like oh say, whether parents can follow their own beliefs in accessing health care for their children. In public school science curriculum. In courthouse displays. Etc Etc Etc.
There are many specific things religious freedom means. But we all start with the 1st Amendment. No political party or outlook owns that.
Like the freedom to homeschool. Each state has its own laws (or none) but we all agree that there should be no additional restrictions on hsers. No portion of the hsing spectrum owns that idea.
Nance
I find very few homeschoolers who agree with me on every issue. (Very conservative in some respects, but highly liberal in others.) However, mention increased regulations and we’re all singing like a choir – in harmony. I think that’s a good thing. I don’t have any need in particular to run with the pack, but it is nice to know that on this one issue, we are in agreement.
Dana – I like hot cider when my throat is raw. It soothes.
Hadn’t thought of hot cider. I’ve been living on hot tea. It feels good. For the five minutes I’m drinking it, it feels good. Unfortunately, there is a limit to how much I can drink.
JJ Ross, I think you linked to that before but can’t remember it (political compass). Would you mind sharing the link again? If it is the first one that comes up on the Google search, it says I’m halfway between Friedman and Gandhi.
Apparently no other world leaders have views anywhere similar to mine. I’ve made up my entire political philosophy and am all alone. Poor me.
As is typical for me, however, I had to just pick several answers. I couldn’t decide if I strongly agreed or strongly disagreed. So I guess that shows you just how strange I truly am.
Yes, that sounds like the the right Political Compass — and it’s trademarked, I think. I was in the lower left quadrant, also opposite from most world leaders and pretty lonely-looking. But not very far from the center point, at least!
It wasn’t the Political Compass one I took, but on some online test of political beliefs I did a while back, I came out exactly at the intersection of the moderate, conservative, and libertarian sections.
Okay, that Political Compass test did not ask me the proper set of questions because they place me as slightly left-of-center (????) I suspect their test was too heavily weighted towards economic issues and not enough towards moral values issues.
I think that Political Compass did place me correctly along the authoritarian/libertarian axis, however, because they’ve got me as mildly libertarian.
Just to completely confuse things, on this test, I scored exactly on the line between socially permissive & socially conservative and moderately as an economic liberal.
But surely government IS weighted toward economic issues, not private morality?
There are still difficulties, however, because I know a few of the answers I gave pushed me further to the left because I had to basically choose yes or no. The questions about predatory practices and major corporations, for example. Particularly the one about what is good for major corporations is good for all of us. I’m pretty sure saying yes puts you toward the right while saying no puts you toward the left. My problem is that I believe that increased governmental regulation of an industry actually favors major corporations. The more regulation, the more capital you need to start up, which limits the competition.
That doesn’t mean I don’t think there should be any limits restricting business, but it makes it difficult to classify me as more liberal because of the way I answered the question.
LOTP: However, mention increased regulations and we’re all singing like a choir – in harmony. I think that’s a good thing. I don’t have any need in particular to run with the pack, but it is nice to know that on this one issue, we are in agreement.
***
Well, if nothing else, it’s nice to know hsers agree on something.
But I think that’s an important something. Just like the 1st Amendment.
There is some ground where hsers of various political stripes can meet.
And it is important to remember these things when we are debating/discussing with other hsers and they are sooo wrong and we are sooo right — we do all have a couple of things in common and we shouldn’t assume otherwise.
Nance
The collective wisdom of group problem-solving needs us to be different in a thousand ways, independent and complementary rather than either competing against each other OR sharing too much sameness. An inbred idea pool isn’t healthy.
Maybe for homeschoolers, it isn’t so much being compatible in “what” we think as in “how” we think. See Spunky and me completely annoy each other for a vivid example!
OTOH Dana delights me with her nuanced, thoughtful, creative approach to complex ideas and issues, as she does above — not valuing the ironclad absolute, black or white, yes or no, good or bad forced choice answer.
Maybe it’s a matter of the thinking hats (modes) we respect and can wear easily.
I love the mental construct of all the different hats — green and yellow, red and white all in turn — whether for use in my own mind or in group discussion and decision-making, with blue balancing all the input and THEN some needed evaluation from black judgment hat-wearing, to flag any flaws and get down to brass tacks.
But too many people only have one hat and they think the others are bad hats. The perpetual red hat homeschoolers quote facts and figures all day and discount everything else, as if facts and figures were “smart” answers and trumped ideas, creativity, optimism, intuitions, and human feelings. The perpetual black hat homeschoolers (judgment, always working to prove something or someone “wrong” including the red hats) make me insane!
Any one hat will get you in trouble without positive synergy between them all. So it’s a huge intellectual, um, SIN to set the hats up against each other to fight, as if only one is right and all the others are wrong. That is very flawed thinking.
*************
“Maybe for homeschoolers, it isn’t so much being compatible in “what” we think as in “how” we think. See Spunky and me completely annoy each other for a vivid example!
”
JJ, You have NEVER annoyed me, tot in the slightest. I value the truth above all else, whether it about a homeschool issue or a national election. Your comments allow challenge what I thing is right and true. If I can defend myself against the most strident detractors and not find a gap in my reasoning then my argument becomes stronger that has value to me. If a detrarctor successfully pokes holes in my argument like swiss cheese, then I’ve learned something even more valuable, I just might be wrong. So your comments have never annoyed me, in fact that have strengthened me and at times pointed out weaknesses. I’m truly grateful for both.
Dana this post expreses in different terminology some of the very thoughts I’ve had, especially this
“Very few truly respect differing opinions, honest debate, and varying worldviews. “
I appreciate that, Spunky.
And I see I erred above — it’s the perpetual white hat (not red) always going for the facts and figures.
<<>>
VaHomeschoolers has made very good strides here in Virginia with both Democrats and Republicans by taking positions *only* on homeschooling issues. We do not support/oppose any particular politician nor do we have positions on any issues outside of homeschooling. When we work with legislators, we emphasize that homeschoolers are “diverse in their beliefs and backgrounds, but united in loving our children, valuing their education, and treasuring our freedom to homeschool.”
During another discussion about politics and homeschooling, I asked our governement affairs chair for her perspective. She made a good point (which I think is illustrated in your story above):
“The big factor here is not that one party is friendly and another is hostile, but that most lawmakers (regardless of political party) know little or nothing about homeschooling. If a lawmaker knows nothing about a particular subject, he tends to vote along party lines. However, the more a lawmaker knows about homeschooling and the homeschooling community, the more likely he is to support our efforts. And the less he knows, the more likely he is to patron or support bad bills.”
I love your posts Dana. I really agree with this one…it drives me nuts when liberal friends of mine completely dismiss conservative viewpoints as “uneducated” or “brainwashed” (please don’t get me started on the word “sheeple”…I hate it). I read a couple of conservative blogs, trying to get a feel for where they are coming from and what I find fascinating is that they make the *exact* same complaints about liberals as liberals make about conservatives…they don’t really understand, they are brainwashed, the media is too liberal/conservative, they are just too dumb etc. Each “side” seems so convinced that if the other side was smarter or not “drinking the koolaid” then they would not hold the views they do. Which either results in completely dismissing the other POV or seeing who can yell the loudest to “prove” their point (because of course each side is “right”).
Anyways, I appreciate the issues and points that you bring up here. I actually think that if conservatives and liberals could get past the stereotyping and rhetoric, they would find that they have a lot more in common then they might think. My personal feeling is that if both sides could remember that we are all people who have valid thoughts and reasons for our beliefs, we could probably make more headway in working together.
But then I also tend to be an idealist…or as my conservative dad would put it…a bleeding heart…
Stephanie, I really like how you phrased this point:
“I actually think that if conservatives and liberals could get past the stereotyping and rhetoric, they would find that they have a lot more in common then they might think. My personal feeling is that if both sides could remember that we are all people who have valid thoughts and reasons for our beliefs, we could probably make more headway in working together.”
I don’t think the real
problem has ever been either the liberals or the conservatives themselves, or any number of groups you’d care to identify and label, but those with something to gain by painting these groups into corners and thereby profiting, whether through monetary gain, political power, or various other benefits.
These days I approach stereotypes and labels with this question: “Who stands to gain by this group being identified as fill-in-the-blank?”
Thank you, Stephanie. And I agree on the idea of the VA homeschool association. If everyone would listen to me, we’d all either have a single inclusive statewide organization, or a group of statewide organizations that coordinated their efforts with lawmakers before going to lawmakers.
I view local support groups very differently. When I go to a local meeting, I’m looking for something entirely different and it has a lot more to do with fellowship and finding like minded people to help me with the challenges I’m facing.
When addressing the government, however, I think sticking to one issue is preferable.
(Taking off sunny, optimistic Yellow Hat and putting on Black Hat to be devil’s advocate)
Which one issue?
Remember the major difference homeschoolers have to face — we’ll never all agree on what’s a home education issue. School governance from vouchers and tax credits; charter schools; free public virtual courses, religious teachings in science class; university acceptance policies; standardized testing; prekindergarten; SAHM treatment by career feminists; drivers ed and military recruiting; health policy such as vaccines, obesity, AIDS, sex/reproduction; special needs and minority student civil rights; mandatory public service requirements; curfews and truancy (our state’s hsers had a divisive battle over truancy law a few years ago) and on and on –
Everything to do with schooling, taxes, teens, family privacy and the Bill of Rights will affect some home educating families. Stephanie will recall when progressive hsers were systematically purged from a longtime HS Advocacy list we had contributed heavily to from the beginning, by a small knot of vocal conservative Christian hsers who felt very strongly about religion being the point of every hs issue, ultimately including a CA case about some private school science book that taught creationism, not being accepted by the CA university system for science credit. We took the position that wasn’t a “homeschool” issue and refused to yield, and were thrown out as religious bigots endangering their freedom with our pesky progressivism.
True. But everyone has the right to petition their government individually or collectively about any issue. When things specific to homeschool regulation come up, most of us seem to be able to work together so it would be nice to have some platform to do so.
There are other issues which come up where we differ greatly. I don’t see a great threat from charter schools. In fact, it seems like the private school at home options are more popular in states where homeschool regulation is minimal to begin with. I think perhaps what some feared was an attempt to take over home education has been embraced more by those states in which a family’s right to direct the education of their children is respected. I have a hard time getting too worked up about it because it seems like we are taking away choices out of a fear of how it might affect us rather than supporting families in the quest for more valid education options.
Maybe I’m too optimistic or haven’t studied it long enough, but the real danger I see in these options is the fact that organizations are not needed. Who needs to join a homeschool advocacy group of any sort if they are under the umbrella of a public school? So perhaps I’m also a tad suspicious of the motives of at least some groups in their zealous opposition to these options.
But that is why I also don’t see a single statewide group as necessarily the answer. Conservative Christians have as much right to organize for whatever it is they want as any other group has to oppose them. And while agreement is great on some issues, we don’t necessarily have to always have the same arguments and talking points.
As a wise person in Europe said advising German homeschoolers, you never know what arguments will work with which politicians and which segments of the population. A diversity of opinions and ways to express them is good. Too much attempt at controlling what everyone is and isn’t allowed to do in the name of home education seems to me like the same kind of thing the government wants to do to us to begin with.
Dana: When things specific to homeschool regulation come up, most of us seem to be able to work together so it would be nice to have some platform to do so.
***
Indeed. And if we could agree what “specific to homeschool regulation” means (I know what I mean but don’t know if everyone would agree) we might look to VA or the recent CA success as models for defending that baseline while allowing for other differences. And offer a platform for sharing information and strategy.
Nance
Wow Dana, I have to admit that your comment made me do a big double-take (”…the real danger I see in these options is the fact that organizations are not needed.”). I don’t think I’ve ever heard that one before. Well… I’ve heard the reasoning, I just haven’t seen it portrayed as a “danger,” and certainly not as the “real danger.”
For myself, the “real danger” is that the word ‘homeschooling’ will come to mean something totally different as more and more “for-profit” programs dilute and change the meaning of the term in the minds of the public, the media, the legislators, the educators, the researchers, and even homeschoolers themselves.
If we can’t agree on what something is, how then do we encourage, support, and promote it?
When I said “danger,” I didn’t mean that it quite that way. I meant that basically some organizations can see this as competition and thus have a vested interest beyond the protection of homeschooling.
I understand what you are saying, but at the same time, I don’t think we are served by fighting creative solutions in the public schools. I think the public is better served the more options we have available to us.
We can fight for the definition of the word. Public school at home works for me. But some seem to be trying to fight the very existence of alternatives, which is what I don’t quite understand.
Just like the real “danger” of homeschooling is more to the education establishment than to anything else. That was the point I was trying to make.
Thanks for the info on politics of home education…I got a lot of information in…
“. . . a vested interest beyond the protection of homeschooling.”
So any sort of money-making enterprise that is for hsing defined as it was pre-charterhsing? That’s the sort of organization you are thinking of?
And still those organizations would presumably fall under the “specific to homeschooling regulation” area of agreement. That is, would be opposed to any increase in regulation specific to homeschooling.
Nance
I view local support groups very differently. When I go to a local meeting, I’m looking for something entirely different and it has a lot more to do with fellowship and finding like minded people to help me with the challenges I’m facing.
******
Yes…I definitely appreciate my various homeschool support groups from which I get different benefits from. I love talking about religion and homeschooling on my UU Homeschool list and I belong to a small local homeschool group (about 7 families) where we do share about politics etc because we all know each other well. I also belong to a real life local inclusive group and another statewide inclusive group where we do keep politics and religion out of most things. I get different things out of the different groups and am glad that they are there.
******
When addressing the government, however, I think sticking to one issue is preferable.
******
Exactly. And JJ, this is not as hard as it seems. At least it does not seem to be here in Virginia. Maybe because VaHomeschoolers focuses on the state level? Or maybe because there is another state organization option for those who disagree?
VaHomeschoolers has a working, elected, volunteer board of 9 people. We meet 4 times a year in person as well as online all year round. We also do an annual membership survey to determine our membership’s position on several issues (I am getting ready to post the results for our latest survey on our website actually). We rely on many, many volunteers to keep the organization working.
Personally I believe that our success has been because we work and focus at the state level. Each state’s homeschool environment is very different…the laws are different, the relationships with the school divisions and DOE are different, the climate is different. What works here in Virginia is not neccessarily going to work in Florida or California or Nebraska.
I am very wary of “national homeschool” anything (movements, groups, etc) even if I agree with what they are trying to accomplish. Just seems as if it is more effective to work at the state level. Especially as that is where homeschooling is really regulated.
What sort of issues does your state-level group work on? Only things that have come up as legal threats to hsers in your state? Or are there other concerns?
Very interesting.
Nance
We work with a variety of issues at a variety of levels. But we limit our focus to homeschool issues only. We do a lot of educating of legislators and school officials in order to avoid major threats. You can get a feel for the scope of what we deal with legislatively in our Legislative Reports (which are distributed via our email list (open to members and non members alike) as well as on our website):
http://vahomeschoolers.org/legislative/2008_03_05.asp
We have volunteer legislative monitors who monitor (online) the new legislation in the General Assembly each session. The most common occurance is that legislation might get proposed which inadvertantly affects homeschoolers (often see this with driver ed changes…legislators forget that this affects hsers as well). If so, we contact the legislator to discuss the issue and work on better language. We rarely have any outright attacks on our freedoms but if that happened, we would immediately know about it and we have ongoing relationships in place with many legislators and with VDOE so we would be in a good position to fight it.
We also have one part time paid lobbyist (our only paid staff member) as well as a couple of experienced volunteer lobbyists. Their job is to work with and educate legislators. We do (if the political climate warrents it) sometimes find legislators to sponsor bills for changes (have had a couple of successful bills go through in the past couple of years, but this year plan on laying low).
We run a toll free hotline and free homeschool email help desk (again run by volunteers and open to members and non-members) where folks can call/email with questions. We also help homeschoolers who are having issues with local school divisions. We find that most issues can be resolved by empowering the homeschooler by helping them understand the law and their rights and by giving them advice on how to effectively deal with the school official. If needed, we can get more involved in working out a resolution. We also keep an eye on trends throughout the state and if needed educate local school officials about homeschool laws.
As mentioned above, we have a good working relationship with VDOE. After some fairly large changes went through in 2006, we (along with HEAV and HSLDA) met with them and gave them feedback on their proposed guidance to superintendants. This past year, they again consulted with us before proposing legislation for an administrative change to the home instruction statute and were open to our suggested changes.
VaHomeschoolers has a comprehensive website (we are in the process of working on a re-design to updat the look) and produces a great bi-monthly homeschool journal, VaHomeschoolers Voice, featuring great articles written by homeschoolers from around Virginia. We have a monthly activities/events email newsletter, an annual conference and regional seminars.
Probably more information then you wanted to know!
Stephanie, it sounds a lot like Florida, so the “state level” hypothesis doesn’t hold. Hmmm. Take driver’s ed changes affecting homeschoolers, as you say. Overreaching mandates are easy to agree we must oppose but what about the “creative options” Dana lauds above and I too defend?
“I don’t think we are served by fighting creative solutions in the public schools. I think the public is better served the more options we have available to us.”
Suppose a great state-of-the-art driver’s ed center with high-tech simulators for every student and a perfect safety record is funded by a public bond issue and built at the community college, operated by the public schools with police officers and the courts collaborating to make it a revolutionary offering? Say there’s a home education component in the program “targeting” or recruiting hs families to participate (for free but with certain rules and obligations and evaluations) and your group is asked to support and promote this creative initiative that can save lives and money, to your membership.
I think I can guarantee it won’t be all sunshine and roses in a garden of mutual support and unanimity. . .
I’m sure there are any number of instances where homeschoolers are not going to agree. Some believe very passionately that certain actions of government are all about homeschooling whereas others wonder what koolaid they’ve been drinking. Here in Nebraska, we cannot even decide whether it is better to “lay low” and let lawmakers sort of forget we exist, or be proactive and develop relationships with lawmakers. Even on regulation not everyone can agree. Some see protection in at least minimal regulation and sometimes even in more stringent regulation.
But I think focusing on this makes it seem impossible for us to ever organize. In reality, however, it seems we are able to come together for a number of instances where homeschool regulation comes up.
I don’t oppose any homeschool organizations nor the very act of organizing. I just think we need to be cognizant of the fact that we do not pay our dues and consider ourselves protected. These are tools to keep us informed. I’m not about to sit and read every bill that goes before the unicameral and I appreciate that we have people who do. I’m not about to maintain an email list to notify every homeschooler in the state of pending legislation, but I’m glad we have people who do.
And when something comes up, each individual family needs to decide for themselves what action, if any to take. I think we can also perhaps respect that homeschooling is not the central issue for many of us. Many homeschool for reasons which are much more important to us than homeschooling itself, and it is unlikely they will be willing to silence themselves on these issues for some “greater good” of homeschooling they may not even agree with.
This has been an interesting conversation- nice work, Dana.
When I think about home education, I don’t see it as separate from any other family function. The state (as of yet) doesn’t regulate private activity until it crosses a certain line- that of causing some harm to another person or their property through force or fraud. The gov’t can claim an interest in one’s health, but they shouldn’t be allowed to mandate exercise and diet. They can publish research that supports the idea that viewing tv or computer games are harmful in excess, but they can’t pass legislation to limit how much time a kid spends playing Halo or watching Spongebob. They can even complain about religious beliefs and practices, but they can’t pass laws that limit the freedom of expression, religious or otherwise, unless it crosses into criminality.
I really wish that we as a country did not view education as a compelling gov’t concern. I know- I’m pipe dreaming about the privatization of education. I alternate that dream with the one about the FairTax. Now if I could just get Hugh Jackman into one of them, I’d be good to go. :p
And when something comes up, each individual family needs to decide for themselves what action, if any to take. I think we can also perhaps respect that homeschooling is not the central issue for many of us.
******
Exactly. And this is something else that I am glad that VaHomeschoolers does. We provide the information on the bills (including links to the actual bills) and encourage people to read them and make up their own minds. We do say whether or not we support or oppose the legislation, but we also encourage people to not just take our opinion. HSLDA “elerts” drive me nuts, because they only provide a summary of the legislation and you are supposed to take their recommendation as to whether it is a good thing or not.
Stephanie, it sounds a lot like Florida, so the “state level” hypothesis doesn’t hold.
****
Huh? You lost me. What does not hold? I never said that the issues we face are not similar, just that the climate and specifics are different so how things are handled might be different. What works in one state might or might not work in another.
From my limited knowledge of FL homeschooling, I do know that there are some aspects that are very different than here in VA (sports access and virtual schools off the top of my head). I also think that evaluations/testing requirements are handled differently.
Other states have umbrella schools (we do not). Some states do not even have homeschool laws (we do). We have two active statewide homeschool organizations that each have lobbyists in the General Assembly. Other states do not. Teachers unions play a large role in homeschool politics in some states, here they do not.
All these differences make for very different ways in which things work. I would never tell another homeschooler in another state how to do things in their state. I would share how things work here and let them decide if things are similar or different enough to work in their state.
*********
Hmmm. Take driver’s ed changes affecting homeschoolers, as you say. Overreaching mandates are easy to agree we must oppose but what about the “creative options” Dana lauds above and I too defend?
“I don’t think we are served by fighting creative solutions in the public schools. I think the public is better served the more options we have available to us.”
****
I can’t say that I disagree with these sentiments.
********
Suppose a great state-of-the-art driver’s ed center with high-tech simulators for every student and a perfect safety record is funded by a public bond issue and built at the community college, operated by the public schools with police officers and the courts collaborating to make it a revolutionary offering? Say there’s a home education component in the program “targeting” or recruiting hs families to participate (for free but with certain rules and obligations and evaluations) and your group is asked to support and promote this creative initiative that can save lives and money, to your membership.
*****
Well…hypothetically speaking…we would not “promote” anything nor work as some kind of agent of the state. We would provide information to our members of options available (including information on the pros and cons, whatever they might be) to allow them to make an informed decision as to whether to participate. We would not actively work against it or oppose it, but would make sure that any “strings” were made clear. And if we saw any potential issues arising, we would work with the school system to remedy these issues. I actually doubt that this would cause any kind of controversy here.
And here is an example of where things are different in different states. I know that utilizing public school resources is a hot topic in many states with some homeschoolers fearing increased regulation. However, here in Virginia, we have had partial enrollment (for academic classes, not sports) as an option for many, many years. It just is not an issue and it has not led to any kind of increased regulation.
Those who don’t want to use it, don’t. Those who want to use it are aware of the increased testing requirements (if the class they take has a required state test they have to take it). But there has been no bleed over or increased regulations on homeschoolers who do not participate. We have worked with local homeschoolers to create more “homeschool friendly” access policies (state law allows access, but the policy is left to the descretion of the local school division).
But this is here in VA and I would never tell anyone else in another state that they should not worry about partial enrollment since I have no idea about their political or homeschooling climate. In another state it might cause more issues, I have no idea. Here it does not.
******
I think I can guarantee it won’t be all sunshine and roses in a garden of mutual support and unanimity. . .
****
I never said that there were never disagreements. Or that issues do not arise. I think the fact that we do not tell people what to think, but rather provide information on which they can make a decision that is right for their family helps. We do take positions at times which are based on our understanding of the political climate and our members’ views. Our membership survey allows people to be heard and we are extremely accessable via email. If we get a lot of questions on a position or issue, we will often write an article on it, usually presenting both sides or clarifying our position. Our goal is to provide information to help homeschoolers make educated decisions, not tell them how they have to think.
VaHomeschoolers has been around since 1993…seems to work pretty good so far!
Stephanie, it sounds like more of a think tank then? Not so much a direct lobbying group?
All I meant about the state-level hypothesis not holding, is that Florida homeschoolers work on the state level also, yet that doesn’t avoid the divisive and difficult nature of trying to decide what the “one issue” actually is –
“Maybe because VaHomeschoolers focuses on the state level?”
Stephanie, it sounds like more of a think tank then? Not so much a direct lobbying group?
*******
LOL! Nope. We are a very hands-on statewide homeschool organization run by homeschool parents to support homeschooling in Virginia. As such we do a wide range of things, including monitoring legislation and lobbying. But we are not only a lobbying group. We provide information to homeschoolers through our website, hotline and helpdesk. We have an annual conference as well as regional seminars. We serve as a media contact. We work to resolve issues with school divisions when neccessary.
http://vahomeschoolers.org
Dana,
Somehow I think not to lose ground and to mobilize against anti-homeschool legislation we need to organize somehow. Iowa desperately needs a voice for home education during the General Assembly.
HSLDA has been, in my mind a pretty good voice – at least at the federal level.