An argument for the homeschooler
This is the presentation I made on a 20 page paper I have written on homeschooling entitled ‘The homeschool advantage.’ In my paper I detail several aspects of homeschooling and make a cohesive argument for the alternative method of homeschooling. In my 6 minutes speech I was invited to give, I had substantially less wiggle room so I picked a point I thought would generate the most controversy/discussion. It kind of worked, but I guess I needed more time to build the argument. Anyway, here the piece, I’d love to hear comments, if you agree, disagree, etc. I love a challenge, so don’t just read, think about it and tell me why I’m wrong. Oh, and beware, it reads how I wanted to speak it, now how it should be written
__________________________
I remember a story my mother shared with me as a child about a young boy whose family moved to a new town and he was enrolled in a big and intimidating new school. The story, which I’ve now found to be written by Mary Schramm, continues about how the boy was afraid of all the new circumstances at first, but that he overcame his initial fears.
One day his teacher told the students to take out their paper and crayons, they were going to draw pictures of flowers. This really pleased the young boy because he loved to draw flowers.
He emptied his box of all 64 colors of his Crayola collection and was ready to draw some beautiful and colorful flowers. But when everyone started to draw the teacher stopped them. She then demonstrated on the board, drawing a red flower with a green stem, and she told the class that was what they were to draw. And the young boy did.
There was another exercise, this time with clay. The little boy thought he would shape a snake with his clay. But the teacher showed them how to make a bowl. And the young boy did.
So it went, day after day. Red flowers with green stems. A bowl, not a snake. What the teacher demonstrated, not what the young boy’s imagination dictated.
The next year, the boy’s family moved again and he was in another new school with another new teacher.
One day, she told them they were going to draw flowers, so they should take out their crayons and papers and get started.
But the young boy waited for further instructions. Finally, he asked what kind of flowers and what colors should they use.
The answer was simple: Draw any flower you want and use as many colors as you want.
When they had finished, all of the students turned in their drawings.
And when the teacher came to the young boy’s offering, she saw that he had drawn a red flower with a green stem.
__________________________
This story illustrates a common problem we, as society face. Following in the footsteps of great thinkers has a few bad side effects, and one of those is that we become accustomed to following, to doing things how they did it. This is exemplified in today’s public school system. One of the detriments to public schooling is the absolute necessity for protocol. You cannot have several thousand students rushed through your classroom yearly and bring the inner genius out of each one, there is simply not enough time. So you establish the ‘correct way’ and contrast that to the incorrect way and that is that.
As is inherent to this approach of educating, we have glorified the uninteresting lemmings of our society, and by necessity have removed the outliers and radicals, because they disrupt the system. Honestly, what would one do with a gifted poet in third grade, why naturally force him to stop that nonsense and focus on national testing so the teacher, school, and state can shine appropriately.
Homeschooling does not fix this problem altogether, but it forces on those who embrace it the opportunity to take another approach. In Homeschooling there is no set curriculum, excepting pending legislation in California, and your teacher is generally a high school grad who never had any intention of pursuing a university education, but is concerned for their childs well being and full of good intentions.
The result, in many cases, is that a balance is reached.
Homeschooling steps back from the idea that education is found in the classroom. Few educators would argue this, in my conversations I have found that educators agree that a true ‘education’ is found when applying the lessons from the classroom in ones home life.
Math, biology, English, physical education, and so on, are all worthless if attended to for an hour a day while sitting in a hard plastic chair.
It is unfortunate then, that from kindergarten to university, the approach to education is still to have students sit there and memorize what I say…. Cause I’ll test you on it later. This is a far cry from what it takes to create free thinking members of society.
In homeschooling, the responsibility to educate is placed solely in the home. Education is given primarily through experience rather than in lieu of it. By circumventing this disconnect, children learn to love to learn, rather than loving to fit in.
Homeschoolers have rarely been accused of being normal, … but this is what we’re going for. Genuine education does not create lemmings, it does not create artists who can draw only a red flower with green leafs. Instead, true education is a way of life, it is looking at life through a lens that you have developed through your learning. This lens is not hard to make your own in homeschool because often your knowledge will exceed that of your parents. There is no pompous arrogance to overcome as there is with traditional teachers. Parents have no ego to protect, so as children try to define themselves they are not stifled by the idea that they are inferior, that pushing the limits is taboo, or discouraged by the public school nightmare of sticking out.
The Homeschool advantage is that we are a bit quirky, we see things differently than most, and there is no correct way to success. In homeschool it is acceptable and just as important to teach practical sense as it is to teach business savvy, and when both are glorified, leaders are produced whose ethics aren’t clouded by compromises and overlooked common sense, we get scientists who study undaunted by what has been done before and who let their research go beyond the established bounds, we get students, the few remaining, that keep our classes from being able to be graded by a robot because we demand the right to find new trails to traditional ends.
The homeschool advantage is innovation and entrepreneurship, qualities that can’t be lectured into ones being, but rather are nurtured through opportunities, experience, and a safe environment to practice.
The homeschool advantage is that we use all 64 crayons, and unabashedly draw outer space flowers, and make snakes out of clay that are used tell bible stories on the dining room table. It is in homeschooling that you learn the things that are unteachable. When education is brought back into the home, families are strengthened, and children are given the long sought after opportunity to become educated.
I actually completely agree with you here. Although I wasn’t home schooled, your general view of a public school education is right on target. There are always a select few teachers who truly know how to help students shine and excel and who do as little as possible to meet the curriculum and as much to stretch small minds, but the majority are just cookie cutter, by the book dough-heads. I know that in the case of my own family, they thought that my brother had ADD simply because he told his teacher he was bored every day. She never even considered that his boredom might be due to her way of teaching rather than a chemical imbalance in his brain.
Alright, I’m done ranting… but I agree.
You make a very strong argument, which I’m sure was even stronger in your full paper. I think the hesitancy people have comes from the stigma of the stereotype, which is a kid who is a genius, but completely socially awkward and I have to say, those do exist. If balance is being sought after, then a lot of good can be done; that is for sure. I think also part of the problem is that society has tried so hard to not leave any student behind that it leaves no room for true growth or free thinking whatsoever. Now it’s just testing and extremely limited expectations. I’ve thought about this a lot, especially since I got married, and now that I have a little one on the way (it’s true), but then I question, could I be a good enough teacher on my own? Are you going to homeschool your children no matter what? It seems to me like there are some children who would benefit more from it and some who would benefit less. Now I’m just thinking out loud… anyway, you make some good points and it makes me think, so good job.
Socially awkward does exist, and often it is a trade off, so I’m not sure which is more valuable to society. I can tell you what is more valuable to me, but that’s besides the point.
Your questions are good though -
Could I be a good enough teacher on my own? I think if you tried to be a teacher you’d miss it already. You don’t know enough to homeschool your kids. The reason why it worked well for us, and the only way I’ve really seen it work anywhere is when the mom is there, excited to learn and explore, right along with the kids. If you want to mimic a classroom, just put them in school and let them chew it down like everyone else. Homeschool fosters the parental relationship, not the teacher student relationship. Sometimes good, sometimes bad.
Will I homeschool my kids no matter what? Nope, not a chance. I firmly believe this should be decided on a child by child basis. If childrens needs are being met and after school family time is enough to foster creativity and free thinking in spite of cookie cutterness of public schools, I’d just as soon let the government pay for my kids lunch.
Just me though.
You just make me feel so good. Thank you! and of course I agree completely.