Homeschooling~In the Public and Government's Eye

Why is that most people believe public education is the only way to become educated? Have these same people ever studied the history of public education? Public Education has been around for less than 200 years!

Did you know that until the 1840s the education system was highly localized and available only to wealthy people? Common-school reformers argued that common schooling could create good citizens, unite society and prevent crime and poverty.(Oh, yes, that way of thinking is working well. Not.) As a result of their efforts, free public education was available for all American children by the end of the 19th century. By 1918 all states had passed laws requiring children to attend at least elementary school. The Catholics were, however, opposed to common schooling and created their own private schools. Their decision was supported by the 1925 Supreme Court rule in Pierce v. Society of Sisters that states could not compel children to attend public schools, and that children could attend "private schools"(or homeschool)instead.

Homeschooling is a radical idea to most people — after all, just how is a child supposed to learn what they need to know to get into college or to get a good job if they aren’t learning all those important things in school? How are they going to grow into responsible citizens without 180 days for sixteen years of compulsory public education? And that time doesn’t count preschool readiness programs and after-school enrichment programs! Schooling is so complicated, and learning so difficult, that a scientific, clinical approach to education seems to be what the best and wisest parent would want for their children.

But something is wrong with these modern day assumptions, which is why alternatives to public and private schooling are thriving.

Homeschooling is radical, in the root sense of the word: in Latin, radicus means root. Compulsory schooling (forced attendance), and now, in the twenty-first century, compulsory education (forced learning) are very recent offshoots of the root way humankind has historically nurtured its young into responsible adults and active citizens.
Family, community, religious institutions, and work were all integrated into the daily lives and upbringing of children. Sometimes there were professional or informal tutors available that some families hired or shared to instruct children at various times for short periods each year; other families used daily chores, apprenticeships and internships to educate their children.
Continuing in these traditions, similar arrangements are made by homeschoolers today.

The concept of universal compulsory schooling is a very recent idea, one that is not even two hundred years old, yet we act as if it is an ancient, sure-fire way to make sure our children “learn something.” Many teachers, parents, and students have written in many eloquent books and essays about how our children do indeed learn something during their public schooling, but often it is in reaction against, in spite of, or not related at all to the fixed curriculum they are exposed to in daily doses (Heinemann, 1999, 1997, 1968 & Holt, 1995).

Are you aware that the words “education” and “school” appear in NONE of our founding documents, such as the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights? Some of our most famous inventors, writers, and politicians were self-taught, learning through mentoring or apprenticeships, conversation and reading, and this route to adulthood continues today (Plent, 1999 & Gordon, 1990)(By Patrick Farenga © 2002).

So, Homeschooling, in many ways, is a return to the roots of our society, where family, community, religious institutions, and work are all integrated into the daily lives and upbringing of children. Homeschooling, including mentorships and apprenticeships, still serves to educate many of our country’s children as it did a majority of our influential leaders throughout history.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So, now you'll understand why I found this article below so interesting. Truly, some people will never understand. Some people prefer to act as sheep and follow blindly behind the sheep in front, without bothering to find out where they are going or why.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Captives in a homeschool
Friday, August 15, 2008

Time Magazine had an interesting comment from, Education and Law instructor, Rachel F. Moran, said who worried about the lack of oversight for homeschoolers in California,


"[T]his series of rulings does indeed provoke some uneasy questions. Right now, all parents have to do is file paperwork stating they are a private school. No one checks in on the students to make sure they are logging in a certain number of hours or passing certain benchmarks. While homeschooling is a "wonderful alternative," Moran says, there is a need for checks and balances. "We want parents to have the freedom to homeschool, but we don't want children to become captives in a homeschool that doesn't prepare them for work or civic engagement as a functioning adult," she says.

In an ideal world, Moran adds, the state should implement a few safeguards. "Hopefully, a way to monitor progress rather than an adversarial reality will be an outgrowth of this decision," she says.

Moran seems to have things a bit backwards. In a free society, the government does not monitor the actions of its citizens nor do we need government approval or oversight to exercise our freedoms. Do I have to fill out paperwork to exercise my freedom to decide what to feed my children or what they wear? The freedom to homeschool and educate our children is not a right granted by the state, but a freedom granted by our Creator from my status as a parent. Moran's comment provokes some uneasy questions.

What "benchmarks" of child development should the state use to measure a child's progress? What legal standard does the state apply to determine whether a child is progressing toward becoming a "functioning adult?" What is the remedy if a child fails a certain benchmark or fails to meet the state's standard for "progress?" What authority does the state possess to subject a parent to its standard over one of their choosing for the education a child?

Does the state have the right to intervene in the parent-child relationship simply because the child fails to meet an arbitrary standard developed by those whose interests may not reflect the interest of the parents?

The natural reaction to such a question is to say that someone needs to "protect the best interest of the child." Attorney and author, Kerry Morgan answers this objection in his book, Real Choice, Real Freedom

"The best interest of the child is secured when the state protects a parent's unalienable right from civil regulation and unwanted private interference, whether philanthropic or otherwise...

Absent the legal destruction of the marital relationship or a lawful adjudication of unfitness based on physical abuse, the civil government is not authorized to act in the "best interest of the child." Absent the existence of such legal disabilities, the "best interest of the child" is always protected by security of the rights of parents to care for and educate their own children. Governmental interference, however, with the child's education abuses the unalieanble right of a parent and is contrary to the child's best interest." (p. 47)

The freedom to educate our children is the natural right of the parent given by our Creator not the state. Parenting is not a partnership. The state has no authority to act in the best interest of the child, unless the child becomes a dependent of the state. But that won't stop some people from trying to do exactly that. As much as Moran worries about our children become captives in a homeschool, I worry more about all citizens becoming captives of the state.