Homeschooling v. Public Education

Public School vs. Home Schooling

The modern debate about the issues surrounding the validity of both public education and home school programs are as diverse as those students served by both systems. For the most part in the United States more people educate their children within a standard public education environment. Secondary to those people who send their children to public schools are those who send their children to private schools, both parochial and non-parochial, in foundation. Third in number but not necessarily in voice is the thousands upon thousands of families who chose to focus their lives in such a way that they and their children learn together within a home school setting. Though for the purposes of brevity the main debate in this paper will simply be between home schooling and public school education.

This work will focus on both the pros and cons of home schooling and public compulsory education. Both a qualitative and quantitative approach will be taken. (Benz & Newman 1998 pages 109-118) Some of the main points of contention between home school advocates and public school advocates are related to socialization, cultural and moral issues, curricular issues, individualized learning issues, and of coarse focused and class size and school safety concerns. (Brezinka & Stuart 1994 pages 1-102) (Greenspan 1994 pages xvi-xviii) The research hypothesis of this work is that the development of diversity, of curriculum, socio-cultural offerings and individualized learning that can only be found within the school setting is integral to the education of all students. Questions that will be asked include: Does a home school setting offer enough curricular diversity? Does a home school setting offer enough socio-cultural diversity? Also, the paper will address the possible answers to these questions in association with the attempts being made by both home school advocates and public school educators and administrators to address all of the above concerns.

Choosing the type of education your child will utilize is a very personal decision and is often debated on a philosophical, psychological and sadly even on an economic level. (Zellman1998 pp. 370-308). Because the decision is so personal and the perceived risks, sacrifices and rewards are so large many people both before and after the fact build very strong and vocal cases for the decision they have or will make for their child. In some cases this very vocal and powerful case for one or the other system can be seen as a demonstration that the other choices are less valid and/or less beneficial to the child. The collective debate often leaves a reader assessing the situation as if it is simply each party defending its choice from possible criticism. For this reason it will be helpful to take some of the main arguments both for and against both public school education and home schooling curriculums and analyze them with as unbiased a stand as possible.

Chapter 2 Review of Literature

Debate about the proper education and development of children has been raging for nearly as long as "childhood" has been an accepted as a separate stage of life. In the early years of this designated position, at least in literature the debate about children's education often centered around the debated best and worst traits of the respective genders of a child's parents and how each would better serve or not serve a particular aspect of child education. The debate over educational attainment from someone other than a parent took place within families who through economics were afforded the opportunity to provide private, at home usually live in, tutors for the education of their children.

Tutors were engaged in much the same way as a good housekeeper and came recommended by the parent's community. They were often recommended for their personal attainment of academic goals, be it publications and/or special knowledge in the popular curriculum of the day or they were simply recommended based on their ability to mold children into the desired form to satisfy the propriety of the day. There was never a standard set of curricular requirements for each era but mainly they revolved around language, math and science and for young women this education was limited and abridged by the learning of domestic arts as well. (Komanovsky 1953 pages 53-99)

The learning and teaching of the classic languages of Greek and/or more commonly in western civilization Latin was regarded as the basis for a good sound educational standard. (Kelsey 1911 pages 180-183) Teaching in the vernacular really did not come about until much later in the development of education. The new focus on diversity has reintroduced language as an important component in educational diversity but teaching students in the vernacular is still the standard accepted practice.

Though the following example is only one of many associated with the issue of culture, language is a very important factor for education in any setting. (Strickland 1957) Through the development of a much larger curricular model in the public school system the student can be offered opportunities he or she would not be offered at home in regards to the number of languages a student has to choose from and the academic and social skill of the teacher with regards to teaching the language. Though this is not to say that some parents do not offer a vast array of knowledge of many subjects including language it may be said that it is very difficult for one or two people to learn and possess enough knowledge to offer the five or so secondary languages that most public schools offer. Yet, on the part of the parent teacher it is clear that parents are offered the opportunity to teach language at a much younger age as public school curriculum does not allow the teaching of foreign language at the most opportune times in the development of children's biologically driven language models. (Mclaughlin 1984 pages ix-xiv) Language is not taught beyond a remedial ESL system in public schools until well into the middle school phase of the system. (Tarone Cohen & Gass 1994 pages xiii-xxii) (Berent 1994 pages 17-19)

Some home school advocates argue that the teaching of especially foreign languages is so integral to the molding of the young mind that true bilingual education can only be attained in a home setting. In addition to that the historical and current immigration rates in the United States also determine the need for English as a second language learning, often a secondary or economically challenged focus for public school systems. (Johns & Morphet 1952)

Some non-native English speaking parents prefer to have at least some control over the language education of their children, this is occasionally addressed within the home school setting rather than the public school system which is often in turmoil about the funding and program base of such a goal. A public school advocate would argue that the immersion technique for the learning of language is simply the best and fastest way for children to assimilate English into their knowledge base and this is best provided in a school where most of the other students speak English as natives.

There are many other issues other than language that are related to cultural curriculum that are in accordance with issues that arise when parents decide to home-school their children. Some of those include access to a culturally diverse arts program. Many public schools have funding limitations and offer only limited offerings. Yet, it can be said that once again the issue of availability and instruction for fine arts can be much more diverse in a public school setting as most public programs still offered music, fine arts and outreach associated with an arts curriculum, despite fears of future funding cuts and they have the resources mostly regarding staff knowledge to continue to do so.

One attempt that home school advocates are making to answer many of the issues associated with any possible lack of cultural opportunity within the home school setting is what is called shared parent centered teaching or home-school cooperatives. In these systems parents in a given region pool resources and share time to both offer expertise of teaching abilities and cultural and social opportunities they might otherwise be unable to provide their children on their own. Through these systems some very promising results have been shown and the results are often very satisfactory. Shared time and resources often allow children opportunities to both socially interact with other children their age, on at least a limited basis and be provided opportunities for learning that might otherwise have not been offered them, through lack of resources or expertise.

It is also important to note here that the trend for home schooling may have increased and the abilities of home school educators to function more effectively has have improved due to the advent and integration of the Internet. The vast amount of information, society and development possibilities for home school and knowledge in general have yet to be quantified or qualified. (Learning Streams Website 2002) "Home schooling is the fastest growing educational option available to families today with over two million children now being taught by their parents at home instead of in public or private schools. With recent advances in distance learning technology, more and more families are choosing to learn at home." (Internet Home School Website, 2003)

Internet offerings are vast, with everything from social societies that provide outreach and opinions with regards to home school concerns and solution to companies that provide whole home school curriculums that meet the standards in the state of origin or require little alteration to do so. (Home School World Website 2001) The internet site: http://www.home-school.com/is a leading magazine, Home School World production that can assist individuals in achieving home school goals and also help answer some of the lingering questions and fears associated with home schooling children. The available information for home school advocates clearly increases the odds that any home school decision will have a far greater opportunity for success than ever before.

Compulsory education offered many new problems which society; children and parents had not really faced before. Issues surrounding the standardized set of educational guidelines which, were are the driving force behind public compulsory education often leave parents and children and sometimes even educators challenged to determine the efficacy of programs and/or policies. In some cases parents chose to simply trust that the best interest of their children was at least at the heart of the system and continue to respond by supporting their children's attendance.

Another issue that arose based on the new cultural focus of education for all has to do with the education of morality, which from the beginning proved to be a strong point of contention between education systems and parents. In the early years of compulsory education can be found a line of thought that enables and even demands the public educator to teach and develop morality within the students they served. The famed turn of the century educator from Columbia University exemplifies the need in his 1909 work on the morality of education:

The business of the educator -- whether parent or teacher -- is to see to it that the greatest possible number of ideas acquired by children and youth are acquired in such a vital way that they become moving ideas, motive-forces in the guidance of conduct. This demand and this opportunity make the moral purpose universal and dominant in all instruction -- whatsoever the topic.

(Dewey, 1909, p. 2)

Even today this is still one of the main foundational arguments in favor of home schooling. Parents do not wish to allow strangers to educate their children on matters of morality and educators would rather have some influence on matters of morality because they plainly effect the social and academic achievements of students in and out of the school system. The prevailing school of thought is that public schools as a government institution shall remain neutral on issues of morality and offer only that which is absolutely necessary to the safety of students

Everyone agrees that moral educators properly aim at enabling individuals to live a good life, but the dominant school of thought about human well being is part of the political theory "that government must be neutral on what might be called the question of the good life... [P]olitical decisions must be, so far as possible, independent of any particular conception of the good life, or what gives value to life. Since the citizens of a society differ in their conceptions, the government does not treat them as equals if it prefers one conception to another." (Simpson, 1989, p. 39)

With regard to public educators there is a double-edged sword associated with moral education. The standard obligatory philosophy so aptly defined in the above citation, be it myth or reality offers a very restrictive set of guidelines from which public educators can draw legitimate and beneficial moral teachings. Public educators take criticism from both those in favor of public moral education and those who advocate for a complete and literal separation between morality and political institutions. On the one hand proponents for civil moral education regard the public education system as if it ignores or neglects necessary moral lessons.

The implication for public authorities is a certain disinterest in the aims of students. This neutrality is appropriate only in so far as we lack knowledge or simply disagree about the good. To be neutral is to be unaligned with any of the parties in a dispute, and to the extent that a consensus exists on important matters no violation of neutrality is involved in preferring one position over other conceivable ones. Where a community exists, students may be initiated into its culture -- inducting its customs and values -- and the very existence of public institutions of education rests upon some agreements of this kind. 3 It is important to know how wide they actually are and how wide they might become. (Simpson, 1989, p. 39-40)

In addition to the criticism leveled by proponents of moral education that the public system does not give enough regard to its role and opportunity as a moral guidance system. Opponents of public moral education, many of whom practice or at least advocate for home school options, regard the moral aspect of the public institution as to invasive and far reaching.

One very current and modern example of the heated issues regarding the education of morality is sex education. Sex education is a federally mandated curriculum. Yet, clearly there are many opponents to the compulsory teaching of birth control and family planning methods to children. With regards to early introduction of sex education many home school advocates would simply rather be the primary providers of this sort of information to their children, wishing to base the information they give on their own moral standards and belief sets. They feel that early introduction of information to children opens them up to experiences and activities that they are not ready for and that they should be allowed final input on the types and speed at which information is offered.

On the other hand advocates for safe sex education, though often acknowledging problems with the delivery of information also stand on both sides of the issue. The real statistically founded fear of innocence or ignorance of risk behavior as a key factor in children's untimely exposure to risk is often sited by educators and parents alike. (Patton, 1996, p. 35) Yet, on the other hand there is also real statistical validity to the idea that the exposure to safe sex teaching is an opening of the mind to engage in risky behavior because it is toted as 'safe' even though it is clearly not.

There is much evidence that both sides of the argument are very valid as exposing children to ideas that implant messages of acceptance upon behavioral activities they may not be ready to engage in can cause lasting social and psychological damage and yet not educating children on issues of how to make inevitable risky behavior safer also opens them up to real danger. In this situation there is a win-lose outcome for children, educators and parents. Parents choosing to educate their own children in a home setting often site reasons associated to these moral dilemmas as at least the starting point for which their decision to home educate was made.

Even in the early years of compulsory education other parents were challenging the system by either refusing to allow their children to attend, or simply not supporting their child into doing so, kind of a work slow down model rather than a strike. Parents simply did not see the value and so continued to make home responsibilities more pressing than school. Some of the parents within the later category chose to believe that they, themselves would provide the best education for their children, as the lives their children would be moving in to would be much like their own and therefore they could provide the best guidance about how their children could plan and develop to meet the demands of their proposed, static adult life.

Though a relatively modern example one might understand the kind of popular curriculum idea I speak of with this example, the turn of the century focus, in both the United States and abroad upon the natural sciences as the source of all attainable knowledge, often known as humanistic. (Graves 1914-page 255) The demonstration of a very hands-on approach with observation and experimentation being the main aspects of the curriculum drove the standards for education for some time and in any way reformed the traditional rote learning approach, which had been popular before.

Defining the era of change after the acceptance of the constitutional ideas of democratic preparation for all potential citizens, compulsory education was adopted as a mandate on both a federal and state level. "The Implied powers of the Bill of Rights give authority to states to require that all children be educated. The rational for state control of education is based on the notion that states need good citizens for self-protection, an in order to have good citizens they must be educated." (ERIC 1992 p. 2) Additionally, the reasons for state control and universal compulsory education go beyond what most people think of as an integral part of inalienable rights, "In other words, the rational for state control of education is based on the notion that education is a duty imposed on individuals for the public good rather than on the belief that education is a right guaranteed to individuals." (ERIC 1992 p. 2)

It might be appropriate to give some historical perspective on the founding beliefs of the founders of the United States, because the standard they set for themselves and for the future is lasting and the education of the individual men also drove their ideas about the fundamental need for education, if not for all at least for those who make decisions for all. Speaking of the education of the founding fathers Walsh (1935) expresses the exception, which comprised the knowledge of the founding members of the United States.

Nine of the members only of that august body can be set down as of ordinary and plain education, though in that number are included men of extensive reading, enlightened views and enlarged sagacity." He adds: "There is no movement on record in which so large an amount of political science, observation, wisdom and experience was brought to bear as in the American Revolution."

These facts are all the more noteworthy because there were almost no free schools in those days and of course nothing like compulsory education. In spite of that fact all the signers of the Declaration were men of well-developed mentality. This is strikingly exemplified in the lives of all the signers. (Walsh, 1935, p. 33-34)

Interestingly enough it was not those people who might voice the democratic standards for change who carried the flag for mandatory compulsory education. Women were often the regional bearers of the establishment of such systems and even though the suffrage war was at its height, women were still unable to vote at the time that they began to advocate the democratic preparation model for the education of all future citizens. (Tinling, 1986, p. 139)

Though this was not by any means a quick transition (Nasaw 1979-page 3) the relative speed at which communities adopted and furthered their educational support systems did initially cause problems with the delivery of education to all. Through the years public and private school curriculum has evolved to better meet the needs of the massive population for which it serves, yet regardless of the attempts to streamline the education system many issues continue to arise based on the simple fact that the system must meet the needs of so many. (Callahan 1962 pages 232-243)

The home school advocate would argue that the reasons for the failure of the public offerings are almost entirely associated with the mass production of services and that the number one need of their children is not mass produced curriculum but a curriculum that is tailored to both the learning style and the personal circumstances of his or her child. (Fine 1990 page118)

The advocate for public or school-based education would counter with the idea that home schooling can not offer the opportunities for diversity of both social and educational attainment as the limitations of the home schooling system requires a student be relatively isolated from opportunities which school settings offer.

Chapter 3 Research Methodology

The American model of education is a system that serves the needs of many people. Diversity is inherent in the sheer quantity of people served. Additionally the standard school model is relatively diverse in that it is driven by state, regional and local agencies that are comprised of many associations and levels of need, specific to their local. Through the continued offerings of options to parents and children, such as the home school option the needs of the greater society are served. (Good 2000-page 212) Though home schooling is not the only option and the charter school movement as well as the growing private school models also serve the needs of a diverse population.