Aziraphale, I'm giving you a big virtual hug for your impassioned defence of public schooling. As someone born and raised in a teaching family who married a high school teacher and who has spend her career teaching in secondary and post secondary institutions, there is no way my husband or I would ever have felt competent to home-school our children.

As "insiders", my husband and I were acutely aware of the "good" and "bad" teachers in the schools our sons attended, but we never attempted to intervene in the selection process. Most of their teachers did a good job--maybe not in the same way we would have done it but an adequate to good job none the less--and some were outstanding. The odd time one of our sons got an inexperienced or unenthusiastic teacher, our job was to teach them coping skills for handling poor leaders or supervisors--skills that we figured would come in handy when they entered the work force. If they complained about being bored because the class moved too slowly, our job was to give them strategies like finding a different approach, or offering to help another student, or asking for an additional task--again figuring these strategies would stand them in good stead later in life. I guess my point is that a big part of the socialization provided in a public school comes from recognizing being a member of a group means individual achievement has to be tempered with a recognition of the needs and rights of others, as well as a willingness to adapt to the situation and the group. That, to me, is a stellar education--not just gaining high marks on a standardized test.

I can also testify that teaching is hard, hard work, and, even after years of experience teaching more or less the same concepts to the same age groups every year, I still was always looking for better ways to present the material. The more I learned about my subject area, the better I was at helping my students understand and work with the concepts. Testing to see if another person has an adequate grasp of concepts is also enormously challenging. It takes a fair degree of knowledge about a subject area to be able to effectively assess and give feedback to another person about his or her level of understanding. I could do that in my own area, but I could never have done it in an area where my knowledge was at the same level as that of my students. Pre-packaged materials and standardized tests just skim the surface of what a good teacher ought to be doing with his or her students.

Finally, I just want to say that I truly believe that a strong public system is only possible if it is supported by everyone. While I understand why a parent might chose a private school or home-schooling for a particular child, every time a committed, passionate, intelligent parent pulls his or her child out of the public system, it weakens the goal of providing a free, universal, and quality education for all children, regardless of their social status and family resources. And that, I think, has profound implications for the society in which our children and grandchildren will be living.

I hear you Gaylene. I'm a product of public education, as is my husband. We are also both now educators in university settings.

I live in the suburbs of Chicago. The Obamas, when they lived in Hyde Park, sent their lovely girls to the exclusive Chicago Lab school. Now, they attend the remarkable Sidwell Friends. The mayor of Chicago? He uses the Lab School, too. My local mayor? Her kids are enrolled in a nearby Catholic school. What does it say about them? Probably just that they put their children above their politics -- something I generally approve of.

I may wish for a different system, but I have two lives directly intrusted to me. Think globally, but act locally! My children will be a benefit to the society with or without the public schools.

There are pros and cons to all choices that matter. Homeschooling, despite its recent growth, only accounts for 3.4 percent of American children. We are no threat to the system.

And socialization? Our modern system was designed to provide a workforce in the industrial revolution. In what other environment do we divide children into matching ages and put them in batches of 20-30? How is "socializing" only with like-aged peers the only good choice? In communities, the younger children and the older sit side by side and learned from one another. My son's social difficulties are greatly helped when he spends time with boys and girls both older and younger on his sports teams, his Lego building club, the neighborhood and church. See him with his peers, and he seems younger, but adults are always thanking him for being so sensitive and thoughtful with their younger children. Older kids learn his competency in math and building and are helping him learn to mature in his interactions. My daughter far prefers homeschooling, mostly because it leaves her more time to spend with her friends.

I support all schooling choices. I would choose a public school again, if the cost/benefit analysis for my children supports it. I might choose a private school, if I can afford it. For 15 years I have seen the results of all schooling choices. I assume all teachers, in all sorts of schools, have the children's best in mind, and I remain open.

I know there's a stereotype homeschooled kid, I've met a few myself. They do not however represent the whole of the homeschooling population by far, any more than the geeky nerdy kid or the stoner represents all of the public school system.

In my experience homeschooling has a disproportionately large group of learning-challenged kids among their ranks, and they are being homeschooled because of the social interaction that they faced in school. I suppose that may be why the stereotype exists. I know many children who are on the autism spectrum (with something like Asperger's syndrome) that have been completely demoralized and broken in the public system, in the halls. Called names, treated as pariahs and being treated as if they didn't exist has changed their lives forever. We all know it exists, and if one of those kids is saved from that by being homeschooled I'm happy that the stereotype exists. They were probably NEVER going to fit in well at school or society, but while we have them at home we can protect their own self-confidence until they reach an age where they become their own persons and no longer are swayed by the opinions of their peers to that degree. That's what I invested in, and I invested well.

Yes, my son was learning disabled. He had dyslexia, and the school system instead self-diaganosed him as ADHD. All I could see as a mom was a child whose spirit was slowly being destroyed and his confidence in himself was crumbling. All by the end of grade one. Yes, I'm vested in the school system, but when they started breaking my child I did what any mother would do and fought to protect him. In the end I felt I had to take him out and save his spirit first, worry about academics second.

What would have been the best solution, had the public school system
allowed it (and they do in some states) was homeschooling academics at
home and then having my child take "interest" classes at our local
school part time. Our local school simply denied me each time I inquired about my child attending part time for band, gym, music, drama, science club, etc. It's been a few years now since we've finished homeschooling so maybe things have improved with the school system, homeschooling system, now. I hope so, we would make a good team together. Homeschoolers tend to be a very community oriented bunch and willing to help!

They do however require us to inform them every year that we are opting
out of the system, and they send us a little letter saying they know we
are doing this. Why do they do this? Because each school is funded by
our taxes. Every school must give a number of students they are
educating and they then get tax dollars based on that number. They
count our homeschooled students in that number, so my tax dollars fund
the kids that go to our local school, but benefit me not a wit. I'm
actually fine with that, I think public education is a great thing too.
It's a system that is not perfect either, and can be improved as well.

I am glad you feel passionately about public schooling, and I hope you never lose that! This has been a great discussion, and you make some good points. There's got to be a better way to educate our children where both sides feel heard and appreciated. I didn't personally care for the article though, as the tone was pretty condescending, and "sotard" was extremely offensive, in and of itself. That has probably colored any chance of me seeing his argument as a reasonable promotion of his agenda.

In the end, parental involvement is the key, and I know that. I chose to be completely involved, but had the school system been better (for us) maybe my children would have had a wonderful experience. My girls were very suited for school and would have been fine. I would have been involved in their education no matter what and the studies show that's the thing that makes the biggest difference. So whether you homeschool or you send your kids to private or public school, if the parent is engaged and involved in the child's academic and social life the child will likely thrive. I think it's because the parent is invested in the child for life and can see when things need tweaking and/or the child needs to be defended or removed from a situation for their own benefit.

Perhaps some day we'll have a system where we both work together for the good of all the kids. I'm sure that's just a dream, but dreamers were homeschooled too. Just ask Thomas Edison.

I have a friend in California whose child has some special learning needs, and the public school system has assigned him a whole group of experts to help him. It sounds like this isn't the typical experience?

Parenting is hard!

I did read the article. It is infammatory is some ways, but it makes some interesting points. I only know 2 home schooled children. They are both amazingly bright and advanced beyond their age group (helps that mom has a master's degree in engineering).

However, I would never hire either of them. Why? Because they lack social skills despite their mother's best attempts to get it for them, and because they believe the world revolves around them. They have never had to share their mother's attention, never had to struggle through frustration as they always had personalized attention. Great for them and how much they have learned, but I simply don't have room for that in my department no matter how brilliant you are.

Again, sample size of two, so not statistically significant.

I am always a bit disgruntled when I hear someone state that "public schools teach for the Industrial Revolution." How many times have they revamped their curricula? I can all but guarantee they were not teaching calculus or advanced computer programming during the Industrial Revolution. Perhaps I went to a more enlightened public school, but I had people in certain classes across numerous age groups. My physics class was a good mix of juniors and seniors while my AP English class was all seniors.

I agree the current system needs work. No, its not perfect. And yes, parents do need to do what is best for their child. It does, however, seem to ingrain the "status quo". If you are born rich, your parents pay for the best schools and you get the best education. If you are born poor . . . well, most of us have seen the documentaries on poor schools.

Even the public system isn't perfect as funds are allocated based on which school district the child lives in (at least in my state). The suburbs here have very good schools, and property values in suburbs with the best schools are the highest.

But at least it tries. Would I send DD to an inner city school here? No. That is why I paid the premium to live where I do.

It is a problem for people better versed in it than me. The US does not have a common culture like Finland. An interesting read: http://www.theatlantic.com/edu.....school-sys

But it is one that affects the very basis of a republic. How can people vote intelligently if they don't have a good solid education?

Beth Ann, I think it is unfair to hold up people of high visibility as an example. There are security issues there. Real ones that are easier to manage in small, private school. But what is wrong or hypocritical to work for a strong public system while having your kids in a private school ? What is wrong in working to strengthen a system for kids who who are not as fortunate as your own ? That is like saying that because the Obamas use a limo with security they are hypocritical in working on public transportation. Or that because Brad Pitt lives in a mansion he cannot build homes for the disadvantaged in New Orleans. Or that because Ben Franklin had his own private library, as did many wealthy people in that time, he should have never started/invented a public library . Really ? There are lots of things in the public realm that I don't personally use but it is not hypocritical of me to support them. I have never needed the fire department or children protective services. But darn straight I support them. That is the advantage of a society, not the hypocrisy of it.

Regarding a child's benefit to society, we should care that every child have a good impact. Otherwise our jails will be full and the roads out of poverty will be harder to travel....this impacts our kids' quality of life and are a huge cost to society. More than a public school education. But beyond that, not everyone can afford a private school or homeschooling. We cannot allow the disadvantaged or working poor and middle class to have the educational scraps at the bottom of the barrel.

In fact, the great respect that I have for my homeschooling friends comes from the fact that all three work very hard at improving public education. One is even on her local school committee. Does that make her hypocritical ?
She recognizes that not all families are as lucky as hers and she wants other kids and families who don't have the choice to at least have a good avenue, because it is the only avenue. Though I am certain that very few parents who criticize public schools regularly are that involved to improve it.

IK, I mentioned in one of my posts above a "team". My son has had access to services through his school that we could not have afforded on our own. The shear amount that he got in school as well as much as we could afford outside of school has been invaluable. Not only for him, but for society at large in interacting with him. This is true of the system throughout our state. It has the added benefit of keeping him in school while getting all the services
he needed. He got speech, occupational, and social thinking therapy as well as an on site social worker. Outside of school we privately do regular talk therapy, social thinking with the woman who does it at school, music therapy and drum lessons. Our budget is at a max but he gets double teamed on everything thanks to the school. My son placed 4 th in our state geography bee and in the top 200 nationally ( out of 5-6 million kids who participated this year ) because of all the support he got in his school. Not to mention all the support I got as a parent since he was 3. Though at 3 , he didn't attend school, the school district provided us with speech and OT at the elementary school several times a week in addition to the private things were doing.

What is really a shame is the offense that people took and the conclusions that were jumped to without the courtesy of reading the article first. I said it before, old article or not, every point that this author brought up is fair and valid and real. The public school system is not perfect but this should galvanize us to improve it for everyone. Whether we use it or not.

Isabel, that's great to hear. I know the system may not work for every parent, but it sounds like it worked for you!

This discussion has been an interesting read. I also read the article which I found condescending and insulting in some places, rather than a logical laying out of a decent argument. [FYI, I've been homeschooling for my kids' entire education and have 5 boys between the ages of 7 and 17.] We are all colored by experience and I wonder about teachers who see messed up homeschooled kids in the public schools and decide homeschooling doesn't work. I wonder if the families for whom homeschooling is working well don't generally send their kids into the school system. I don't know. I bet it's a mix

As for his first example of the girl taken out of school for a year and, from what he could observe, taught nothing during that time, those types of situations frustrate me as well. They give all homeschoolers a bad name.

The paragraph on science is insulting and inaccurate. But that's an argument for another day.

He is right about some homeschoolers going to college and diving into drinking hard core. He certainly couldn't argue that it doesn't happen with public schooled kids as well, so I'm not sure of his point. Homeschooling is no guarantee your kids won't make bad decisions later. Agreed.

If a classroom truly is a place for good discussion of opposing viewpoints, I would agree being a part of that has fantastic benefits to a student. I remember good discussions in high school 20+ years ago that helped me develop my opinions today. My classmates and I would try to figure out who our teachers
voted for or what "side" they were on on various issues and we usually
could not. Most of our teachers were very good at trying to get us to
think, rather than telling us WHAT to think. From what I've read and been told, some things have changed since then. Is that type of discussion still happening? How many teachers allow a good discussion of conservative politics without trying to make conservatives out to be the evil bad guys? I'm honestly asking. It seems from what I have read recently, many classrooms have become places where every viewpoint is seen as valid and good unless it's Christian or conservative.

Since others have brought up anecdotal stories, I have a former-journalist cousin who decided to teach high school with the stated goal of turning those kids into democratic-voting liberals. No matter what side of the political fence you are on, that kind of attitude in a teacher ought to disgust everyone. Aren't teachers supposed to teach kids how to think, not just tell them how to vote?

Another anecdote... my SIL taught in the public schools for 10 years and is a great teacher. But after those years she is one of the biggest homeschooling supporters I know and says if she had to do it over again, she would have homeschooled her own kids.

There are definitely down-sides to homeschooling and they should not be dismissed out of hand. There are social things my kids aren't picking up on, but I'm ok with that for now. They are around lots of other kids, but yes, many of those kids are similar to them. I'm not sure how to avoid that. We live in a very lily-white area of the country unfortunately. It's not my goal to insulate them from other viewpoints and we expose them to all sorts of viewpoints at home. We have lively discussions about logic, politics, religion, sex, you name it.

The pros and cons of homeschooling are a mixed bag. We have had the advantage of having our late readers at home where they could develop at their own pace. BUT my oldest son could use a bit more push to get academics done in a timely manner. Honestly, if we could afford it I would probably send my kids to a Classical Christian private school for high school but that simply isn't an option. The only private school near us is very tiny, expensive and they use ALL workbooks. Um, I could do that at home for way less money.

There will be holes in my kids' education, I guarantee, just as there were holes in mine. That is inevitable. It's a matter of deciding which holes you find most objectionable. Every parent has to figure out their priorities and what will work for each child. There is no one perfect answer to education.

Just an aside, I find it amusing that some keep bringing up being able to afford homeschooling. We can't "afford" it according to the world's standards. We chose a cheaper area in which to live so that I could manage to stay home with the boys. But we are far from wealthy. It has been a definite sacrifice, though worth it to us. Homeschooling is far from perfect but the benefits outweigh the downsides for us.

QFBrenda, I want to give you the othert side's point of view on this:

How many teachers allow a good discussion of conservative politics
without trying to make conservatives out to be the evil bad guys? I'm
honestly asking. It seems from what I have read recently, many
classrooms have become places where every viewpoint is seen as valid and
good unless it's Christian or conservative.

As a non-conservative and non-Christian, I have to tell you, the incredible amount of money and power behind the conservative Christian efforts to change public school curriciculums and allow what can/can't be read or taught is really frightening. So my concern isn't on keeping that POV out -- it's that it's already in there, and presented as fact, and not as belief.

I am sure you disagree with this, and I'm not trying to start an argument, just providing my perspective.

I think you bring up a good point, Brenda, about the conservative and Christian viewpoints not being as prominent in the public system as more secular and liberal viewpoints, but I'd argue that families with those perspectives who choose alternative forms of education don't do much to help disseminate those perspectives within the public system.

I've been lucky to have well-spoken and articulate students who present good arguments from both the politically conservative and fundamental religious perspectives in my classes, and, although my own thinking is quite different, I think other students and I have all benefited from hearing their views. I don't think any of us grow by putting ourselves into environments where everyone shares the same way of thinking. And that's why I think, for all its shortcomings, a public school is the best opportunity most of us will ever have to mingle with a wide variety of other people.

I'll also concede that it's often hard to reconcile our desire to help our own children succeed to their fullest potential with the more abstract needs of helping other children who may not have the same advantages or situations meet their potential. But I truly believe that Thistle makes a very good point that high marks and academic achievement, once you leave school, don't automatically guarantee success. My office regularly held bewildered A+ students who couldn't understand why a supposedly "lesser" student was hired instead of them. It's very hard to tell a student who has concentrated for years on his or her own achievements that he or she might have been better off spending some time learning to work with others, especially ones who don't share their values and motivations, instead of aiming for those high grades.

Public schools, to be really good, need to hold all kinds of students--high achievers, those with low motivation, kids with learning disabilities, students from different neighborhoods and backgrounds, conservatives and liberals, Christians and non-believers. Segmenting and dividing, to me, just reinforces the barriers that make it easier to see those who have opposing opinions as "the other".

IK, I can understand you feeling that way. I honestly can't speak with any personal experience about how the schools are now since I haven't been involved with them. I'm sure both sides feel the other side is oppressing them. What you say has probably been true over the course of the last few decades, but I'm not sure I agree that it's still that way today. Things in our culture, and therefore probably the schools as well, have changed a lot in the last 5-10 years. I'm betting we would disagree on whether that change is positive or negative.

Gaylene, thank you! Once again, in your clear, concise way, you have got to the heart of what I was fumbling to express. You said this:

Finally, I just want to say that I truly believe that a strong public system is only possible if it is supported by everyone. While I understand why a parent might chose a private school or home-schooling for a particular child, every time a committed, passionate, intelligent parent pulls his or her child out of the public system, it weakens the goal of providing a free, universal, and quality education for all children, regardless of their social status and family resources. And that, I think, has profound implications for the society in which our children and grandchildren will be living.

That's the bottom line.

Isabel, you said something similar -- thank you also for this comment:

Regarding a child's benefit to society, we should care that every child have a good impact. Otherwise our jails will be full and the roads out of poverty will be harder to travel....this impacts our kids' quality of life and are a huge cost to society. More than a public school education. But beyond that, not everyone can afford a private school or homeschooling. We cannot allow the disadvantaged or working poor and middle class to have the educational scraps at the bottom of the barrel.

Beth Ann, you seem like a lovely, intelligent, reasonable woman, and while I still disagree with homeschooling as a growing movement, I can certainly understand you dilemma. If the public school system is so dreadful that you are forced to consider other options, then you have to do what you have to do. And, as the author of the article states, you are the best kind of homeschooling parent -- i.e. a well-educated person who is committed to providing a superior education to your children. But you're still only one teacher, and homeschooling is still the lesser of two evils. If I were faced with such a choice (and given the financial resources I have now), I'd move to somewhere else that had a better school system. I don't think we'd be able to afford private school either (and as it happens, all the private schools in my area have religious affiliations, which obviously won't work for my family!).

Kim, your reasons for homeschooling are valid. Or at least, the closest to valid that I can see. Like TraceyLiz and Beth Ann, your children were unsuccessful in a regular school. And you raise a good point, that the "homeschooled-kid stereotype" may be in part due to the fact that kids who get pulled from public schools may have been socially awkward to begin with, and that was part of the reason they weren't achieving success in school. The only problem there is that kids who struggle socially aren't going to struggle less if you remove them from other kids. You are taking away their opportunity to learn to socialize. A better option, if there's bullying, might be to try a different type of school. I know a family where the daughter was mercilessly bullied in public school. They switched her to a small Catholic school (even though they're not Catholic) and she blossomed. That cost money, of course, but the other option would have been to move her to a smaller public school that was not in her catchment area, which might also have worked.

QFBrenda, thank you for your careful and rational explanation. Again, I cannot agree with your reasons to homeschool, or even your preference for private Christian schools, but I respect your opinion and admire the way you expressed it. And for the record, I don't think it's ever a good idea to segregate children based on religion. There should be no private Christian (or Jewish, or Muslim, etc) schools. I'm fine with places of worship. I'm fine with people raising their kids as members of a congregation. But religion belongs in churches, synagogues and temples, not in schools.

IK, I was going to call QFBrenda out on the conservative Christian comment, but you beat me to it.

Thanks again, everyone, for the thoughtful and civilized discussion. It's so easy to get snarky or huffy with topics such as these, because opinions are firmly held and feelings run deep, and yet on the whole people have been really respectful. Plus, the article was intended to be inflammatory, I think.

I still haven't heard a really winning argument to my original question, though.

...and once again, I have to reprint something Gaylene said. I stated above there should be no religious segregation in education. Gaylene explains why:

Public schools, to be really good, need to hold all kinds of students--high achievers, those with low motivation, kids with learning disabilities, students from different neighborhoods and backgrounds, conservatives and liberals, Christians and non-believers. Segmenting and dividing, to me, just reinforces the barriers that make it easier to see those who have opposing opinions as "the other". (my emphasis)

QFBrenda: one more comment: I know you're not rich. I know you've made sacrifices so you can afford to stay home with your kids. But you are still relatively privileged. There are many, many people who cannot in any way afford to homeschool their kids. What about single mothers, for example?

I think the debate over homeschooling seems to be very similar to a debate the has raged in my generation over Stay at Home Mothers and Working Mothers. Whichever choice you made , that 's which one women decided was the right way and looked at the opposing view as wrong. In addition there seemed to be this sense of dismissing the choice of stay at home mother's with a "well if you can affford it, you are lucky". When the reality is a lot of families made hard choices to make that happen...

I've been on both sides of that issue and can see merit in both choices and refuse to say that my choice is right for someone else. My choice is right for my family!

With the school versus homeschooling issue, I too have been on both sides of that issue and think that makes my perspective broader and more able to see the entire picture... If you've not experienced both, then you have some blinders on and can only come at it from your own limited experience. There is no one size fits all solution to most things. There are good schools and good teachers , but they are working in a broken system, which is not in debate and an accepted reality. There are parents who will do homeschooling poorly and those who will succeed way beyond what the school could provide. Neither is perfect, and one doesn't deserve to be attacked more than the other.

Taking a strong position to justify your own choices is part of the problem that created the SAHM vs Working Mom war that took on a huge detrimental life of it's own and caused women to judge each other harshly. This was such a bad time in our society... We should learn from history...

Tracey, I support both working mothers and stay-at-home mothers.

I also recognize that people sacrifice to make staying at home possible, because it's important to them. That's totally valid.

I still say that QFBrenda is relatively privileged, in that many mothers (all over the world) simply do not have the option of not working. Brenda may choose to live in farther-from-the-city-centre neighbourhood, and have a less costly home, and bake her own bread to save money. These are sacrifices she is willing to make, because she wants to stay home with her kids. I repeat, I fully support anyone who makes such a choice. However, she still has a husband who goes to work to provide for their large family (having five children is also a choice; you could have fewer, and more disposable income). She is therefore in a position of privilege.

ETA I was a stay-at-home mother for ten years, and I did it because it was the right choice for my family. Really, I am capable of seeing more than one point of view. Nobody has yet said anything that makes homeschooling seem like a desirable option. For certain individuals (like for your son) is was the better of two non-ideal options -- but really, the country would be better off if they actually fixed the public school system. Or perhaps the better word would be improved. The system isn't broken, at least not everywhere. (It sounds like it's pretty broken in Beth Ann's area, though).

 Regarding being privileged :  I have never met one homeschooled child whose parents lived in a tenement or in a rented apartment.  I have also never met a single mom who home schools.  

We ARE absolutely privileged.  When is having a smaller home a sacrifice ? When did having to cook become a sacrifice ?  ( I make our own bread often too..we don't eat out much, we tent camp for vacation.....)    It is called money management.  You take a little away from there to have more here. That is how to budget. The fact that we even have the money to balance and budget around our priorities  is an absolute privilege.  And as a liberal Christian, I thank God every, single day That i have money to stretch . I am a SAHM and it is never a sacrifice or a burden to not have everything I want so that my son gets what he needs.  Why is it ok to budget to have a big house but a "sacrifice" to do it to stay home or homeschool ? I also take my responsibility as a Christian very seriously : to care for my brethren. That means children , all children.

I would also like to point out that for many SAHMs, staying home is cheaper than working.  When you add up daycare, commutes, clothing...it costs more to work. 

And yes, AZ, we have been all over the place and sadly even into politics.  You are right, there is no compelling argument for homeschooling on aggregate as a benefit to society.

Brenda, how do you know that ? Has there been a study done on that tracking teachers ? Have you experienced it ? What conservative values are being villainized in schools ? This is a very serious accusation and I am hoping for some specific examples of what is happening. Because in all schools that I I have been involved with , sharing, inclusion and compassion are a mainstay. That it rather Christian to me.

Aziraphale, I have mixed thoughts on the subject of private religious schools, based mostly at looking at the history of the US. I'll admit I'm ignorant on how the great Canadian universities were founded. But here there were moments where particular religious groups placed a very high value on creating broad-spectrum educational institutions (Quakers and Unitarians and many others). Also there were moments when religious schools could sometimes function as pathways out of poverty (I'm thinking of inner-city Catholic schools). I'm related to a founder of the University of Maryland and Swarthmore. My late grandmother, born in 1900, went to a four year woman's college, which was almost unheard of at the time, because in her religious Quaker family education was very highly valued.

I do agree that no public monies should go toward schools that discriminate in any way, and agree with many of the points of the joint statement by the ACLU and religious organizations on religion in public schools. https://www.aclu.org/religion-.....ic-schools The popular perception that religion and education/the sciences are at odds seems so pre-industrial to me in some ways, but it's undoubtedly happening with some specific (not all) religious groups.

I kind of think of it like this. If a particular religious group gives up on participating in and supporting the most rigorous and challenging and discovery-based forms of education, particularly higher education, particularly in the sciences, what does that do to their ability to influence the course and development of society?

In my experience there are plenty of highly educated conservatives. Toss a pebble at Dartmouth and you'll hit one. ;), there are also plenty of conservative intellectuals who have lamented the turn away from the value of education and an objective approach to science by a segment of the group and think it is harming the movement.

There are also plenty of progressive and liberal people of faith and faith-based institutions, but their voices sometimes get drowned out in popular media.

I usually do some volunteering before elections and sign up young people to vote. At first I used to listen to long-winded explanations about how opting out of the system was taking the moral high-ground, but eventually I just started to say, 'thanks, sorry to bother you' and moved on to the next person. If you don't participate, it's hard to be heard.

I also have to say I'm very glad to be sharing this forum with all of you and having the opportunity to listen to all of you, really and truly. It's not a conversation that happens often in real life without divisiveness or without avoiding topics of disagreement out of politeness.

Tracey, your point about the sniping that went on between those women who chose to stay home and raise their children and those who opted to remain employed in the workforce is exactly the kind of division that I deplore. The tenets of the feminist movement that I was supported in the sixties was that women ought to be able to make their own choices as to what was right for them and that we ought not to view someone who chose differently as "the Other".

But I think public vs. private vs. home-schooling is not quite the same. As parents, we quite rightly exert our authority to make the decision as to when, where, and how our children will be schooled, especially when they are young. Most of us also exert a considerable influence on who is allowed to have access to our children and with whom they can associate. We choose for them. We can expand, or contract, the environment in which they learn, the challenges they need to cope with, the similarity (or differences) to our own values that they will encounter, and a host of other factors too numerous to mention. For most of us, public schooling is the single best way to ensure that our children meet and mingle with people who are not like us.

Public schools are not perfect environments, but it's a stretch, in my opinion, to call it "a broken system". For most children, the challenges that they will encounter in a public school are not insurmountable if they are given the tools and strategies they need to look out for their own best interests while being careful not to trample on the needs and values of others. I'll admit that there are extreme situations which call for extreme measures, but I'll counter that a child coping with this type of situation without any intervention from the adults in a school is highly unusual in my experience. Learning often is unsettling and even upsetting because we find ourselves on unfamiliar ground; helping a child cope with, and turn around that situation, is one of the best parts of being a teacher.

We all have the right to chose what we think is in the best interests of our children, but, like Elisabeth, I'm still curious as to why so many people feel that the current public school system has so little to offer their children and why they feel that learning from pre-packaged programs in a more protective, personalized environment is the better choice. Is it just about higher academic achievement or less stress--or is there something more?

I have just got to say that as an aggregate, Canadians have the US beat when it comes to public school performance. I'm not sure, but I don't think the experience of being a teacher in Canada is quite the same as that of teaching in the US, sadly. In many places public schools are broken for many students and teachers or at least highly unequal. There are also people devoting their lives to fixing them but there can be a lot of fighting and lack of communication between stakeholders.

Thistle, I forgot to read the article about the Finnish school system that you posted, so I just went back and did so -- it makes me want to send my kids to Finland to learn. Or Denmark. We have Danish friends, and I'm deeply envious of the way they run their schools.

Thank you also for your comments. My experience with homeschooled kids has been similar to yours, actually. I have a larger sample size than two, but it's still not statistically significant -- which is part of the reason I started this thread in the first place. If we're going to give anecdotes, I'll mention that the few homeschooled kids I know have not impressed me with their grasp of appropriate social behaviour. For example, I've been to a funeral where the homeschooled granddaughter of the deceased got up to the pulpit and cracked tasteless jokes that made the congregation cringe. I've met the homeschooled seven-year-old boy who viciously and repeatedly kicked a smaller boy in the head while his mother's back was turned. I've also, just this weekend, met the homeschooled little girl who doesn't know how to talk to other kids at the party. Does this mean ALL homeschooled kids are socially backwards? No. Does it mean no public school child ever exhibits antisocial behaviour? No. But it's interesting that of the small group of homeschooled kids I know, not one is what I would call socially "normal".

Rabbit -- yes, I've heard that Canada's doing better than the U.S. in the public education department. From what the American moms on this forum have said, it sounds like it could be true. I feel like I got a pretty good public education, and when I taught school, I felt that most kids were supported by the system. It could still be improved, and I feel we're actually going downhill now. There are more budget cuts every year...sigh. They just cut the band programs to all middle schools in my district this year, for example.

ETA oh, and also, regarding your comment "There are also plenty of progressive and liberal people of faith and faith-based institutions, but their voices sometimes get drowned out in popular media" -- yes, you're right. It sounds like Isabel is one of them. The world needs people of faith like Isabel.

I call it a broken system due to my experience where the educatators themselves are saying that and not just formed from my own judgements. There is a lot in the media regarding the failure and problems NO CHLD LEFT BEHIND created....

My child's experience was of deep concern to all the educators involved who were limited by the system that allowed him to slip through the cracks. I was asked by these educators to come speak for them to help solve these issues. In our school system there is stupid testing that is taking precedent over education and tying the hands of incredible professionals. My letters to the Superintendent went completely unanswered and unacknowledge...

I will say that the way they are teaching reading these days is causing "reading disabilities" compared with teaching methods in the past that focused more on phonetics. This directly resulted in my child being told he had a learning disability, which he now refers to as a "teaching disability". The proof was strong when I spent $300 the summer before he went into 5th grade to put him in a Summer reading program. At the end of his 5th grade year, they showed me a chart of his reading level which has a marked increase between the end of fourth grade (directly showing the success of the summer program), it then showed a huge drop and then by the end of the year had gone up to where he began the year.. He is now reading the same books his brother read in his advance English class at this grade level. In just two years of homeschooling, I did that!!!! I have so much work to do still to help this child make up the defecit in writing that this whole thing caused and that is my reason for continuing to homeschool through High School. I need the time homeschooling allows.

The priority in our schools is to get the children to pass those tests.... In hindsight I see that his IEP was only for that benefit and not at all to solve the problem at hand. I hated hearing how well he did on testing, like that mattered when he was a struggling reader, three years behind and even worse in writing. I hated every IEP meeting where they kept telling me how intelligent he was and that he would work this out... All he was doing was developing coping mechanisms that would have only taken him so far. I know how lucky I am to be able to do this for my son and am all too aware that there are so many still struggling within the system.

A school system where a Vice Principal says, " We are behind the eight ball with verbal learners." certainly reads as a broken system... How many kids fall into that category??? Since there are 7 learning styles the number is staggering... The school doesn't even acknowledge all these styles in the artcle linked below.... I've seen many questionaires the high school gave our son to discover his learning style and they only address the first four listed...
http://www.learning-styles-online.com/overview/ Those are the only four I hear discussed among educators in my entire 22 years expereince with children in the school system...

This is my last posting on this issue.

This has been a fascinating discussion. Thank you for raising it, Aziriphale, and thanks to all who have participated. As rabbit says, it is rare to find discussions of such an important subject carried on in such a civilized way.

I think what we are seeing here, in this conversation, is a mirror of what public education, at its best, can offer our children.

A partial mirror, at any rate. For while we differ from one another in income, profession, ethnic background, religious beliefs, and political perspectives, we all love clothes. And we are all (roughly) middle class and quite educated.

I hesitated to jump in here because I wasn't sure if I had anything to add to the discussion. I'm still not sure that I do, so I hope you will bear with my rumblings here.

First, I'd like to say that while I appreciate this discussion, I agree with those who did not care for the article. I felt it was reductionist, offensive (sotard! SOTARD????), and poorly supported. In short, a rant. (Or, as MaryK put it , a piece stuffed with straw men.) Rants can make for fun reading, but they don't make for good policy.

Having said that, I agree with Isabel that "there's no compelling argument for homeschooling on aggregate as a benefit to society."

Which doesn't mean I condemn people who decide to homeschool.

I also believe homeschooling can offer benefits that public (or private) schooling might not offer -- in specific situations. So it's unfair to paint it as evil or socially irresponsible.

Ultimately, I'm a big supporter of public schools -- with reservations. For some kids, in some situations, school (whether public or private) is a bad fit. And if the "system" isn't broken, I'd say at minimum it's wearing the vestiges of its 19th century past a little heavily and could use some serious "refreshing."

Tracey -- re. "My letters to the Superintendent went completely unanswered and unacknowledge..." Did you send more than one? Maybe he (she?) missed your letter. Did you leave out your customary triple exclamation marks and question marks? A superintendent has to handle an irate parent with caution. Certainly if I wrote a letter to our superintendent and I did not get a reply, I would send another one and arrange for an in-office meeting.

Clearly you are passionate about this. You were, in essence, able to provide private tutoring for your son, and now he's doing far better academically. I don't think that's up for debate. I also think it has been shown that a well-educated, conscientious homeschooling parent can bring their child up to grade level and beyond. But this is not the issue I'm trying to get at. Homeschooling has certain very specific drawbacks, and it is a challenge for the homeschooling parent to overcome them. A parent has to have a very good reason to homeschool. I am genuinely concerned that the homeschooling movement is going to undermine the public system, which in turn will affect the whole country (be it Canada or the U.S.) in a negative way.

Suz -- thanks for weighing in. I agree with you about "sotard". It's terribly offensive. But then, I think the author was being intentionally inflammatory. He started the article with "At the risk of offending...". That shows that he's out to offend. But he has some good points.

I also wanted to add a bit about my own background so you know where I am coming from. I was educated in a public school myself and in publicly funded universities. Meanwhile, my husband was educated mostly in private schools in the US. His older children attended public schools in Canada and one went to a private US university while the others remained in Canada for their post-secondary education.

My husband taught in a university. I taught both in a high school and later in a university. I've also taught in several privately funded schools. We're a family of teachers, in short.

Our daughter began in a large, diverse, publicly funded school. It was an excellent school (in Vancouver, as it happens) -- and she was lucky enough to have a fine teacher in her first grade. But one good teacher (and one beleaguered support worker) could not meet her needs.

About her: She's truly a "quirky" kid who does not fully meet the diagnostic criteria for any recognized "disorder" (although she now has an LD designation and she is verbally gifted). What this meant was that she did not qualify for the academic support she needed. As for social support -- quite honestly, unless you are extremely lucky, as Isabel has been -- public school can be a social nightmare for a child with social disabilities. Even the best public school. Even when everyone is very "nice" and wants to help. In our daughter's case, far from teaching her social skills, the kids (and some of the teachers) at her public classroom taught her that she was weird, bad, and unlikeable -- without teaching her how to do anything to change those perceptions.

We moved back to Ontario and placed her in a small private school.

That school could not meet her needs, either. Academically, it was a better placement, with an enriched curriculum and an arts-heavy program (her strength). But socially, she was even more isolated.

Midway through her fourth grade year, we felt compelled to take her out of the school. (By this time, at the age of 9, she was suicidal due to the social situation). I homeschooled her for the remainder of the year.

Note: I have an education degree. With advanced training in learning disabilities. Still, I found this an incredibly difficult job. (Believe me, I'm not blaming the schools for failing to meet her needs. It's not easy to do! And my hat is off to any homeschooling parent who can manage this situation with grace and aplomb!)

I found that in my community it wasn't as easy as I had hoped to link up with other homeschooling families. Organizing group activities was tricky. And teaching subjects that are not my strength was hard. It might have been easier with a plan. But I was thrust into this situation, so I did the best I could. I did find her a super outdoor ed. program one day a week, and also managed to gather some online learning resources. But it wasn't ideal.

The following year we found a very small private school for kids with special needs. This was an excellent choice from the point of view of helping her build confidence. Academically it wasn't the best, and socially it was less than ideal as well, because the classes were so small. (Only 5 other kids, the first year).

But for three years she muddled through. It was the best placement we could find.

Now she attends a medium sized public high school. She is doing reasonably well academically -- shining brilliantly in her best subjects (English and art) and managing to pass her worst subjects (math and science).

Socially, she continues to struggle. She has trouble making and keeping friends. And that is a problem that is probably going to continue throughout her teen years, maybe even into adulthood. I hope it will change -- but I can't be sure it will. All I can do is love her and do my best to provide scaffolding, support, therapy.

Suz, thank you for elaborating. You are, as always, so lovely. Your experience certainly lends credit to your point of view. And you brought up the important point that sometimes, no matter how hard we try and what choices we make as parents, there is no magic solution for a struggling child.

The fact that you have an education degree and advanced training in learning disabilities, and yet you still had, as you put it, "incredible difficulty" homeschooling your daughter, is telling. If you had a hard time, what about the untrained parents?

Compared to the rest of the world, we are absolutely privileged. Single parents would not have the choices I do, obviously. If there's only one parent in the home, homeschooling will be nearly impossible though I know some who have accomplished it.

Isabel, I meant no accusation. I was honestly asking. And I was clear that I have no recent personal experience. My impressions have come from radio, online newspapers, commentators, etc. Examples that immediately come to mind include a story I recently heard of a young girl who was denied the right of reading her Bible during free-reading time when she wasn't pushing religion on anyone else. I've also heard playback of a teacher YELLING at her students about how Obama was the best President ever. Those are anecdotal and hopefully isolated. I'm sure examples could be found from the other point of view. If you have had good experiences in public school, I'm glad it's working for you. I would never deny that some kids do great in a public school setting. I'm all for doing what works for your family.

I did find this article: http://christiannews.net/2014/.....ard-christ

I'm not looking for an argument because 1) I don't think we'll convince each other, and 2) neither of us probably has time for one.

For what it's worth, I found this documentary interesting: "Waiting for Superman" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1566648/ This one is NOT religious and not about homeschooling. But it does have interesting info on some of the public schools in our nation and the kids trying to find other alternatives.

This thread puts me into a delicate position. I feel very strongly about some of the issues raised, but they might also be tangential to the main point of the thread and I don't want to derail a good discussion. I also very much respect the women here and would prefer not to create any unpleasant feelings over politics/religion. This is certainly why those subjects are rarely discussed in polite company.

So let me just quickly say that a conservative or progressive bias in public education is strongly dependent on the area in which ones lives. There are many public school districts where the population, including educators, leans heavily conservative and that is reflected in the ways things are taught.

And regarding "controversial" science, there IS no controversy. Virtually every reputable scientist worldwide agrees on the science, and politics has no business being involved at all. To not teach our students what every bit of evidence over the course of decades, even centuries, has demonstrated is a failing of the worst sort.

I think the reasons that I found it difficult to homeschool had to do with the specific needs of my child, combined with the fact that I was thrust into it quite abruptly without time for preparation (and while I was also holding down several contract jobs plus trying to juggle some creative work). It was an unusual situation and I don't think my experience is representative of what homeschooling at its best might be.

I do think that my reasons for homeschooling may be similar to those of some other parents, however. And this is where I think the argument about social skills falls apart.

Public schools may teach important values such as tolerance, respect for difference, etc. I do believe that the best public schools accomplish this. (That's one reason I taught in a public school!).

But to say that public schools can do this (at their best) is not to say that they always manage it. Nor is it to say that those values couldn't be taught (maybe even better taught?) in other ways.

And when it comes to social skills, some children do (perhaps) learn them by jostling along with their peers -- as the author of the article assumes. But other children learn nothing from proximity to their peers. Or, what they do learn is all damaging -- not only to their spirit, but also to any further development of their social skills. You do not develop positive social skills from being ostracized, teased, bullied, and treated like a pariah.

My support for public education arises from my political beliefs more than anything else. As a trained educator and a lifelong learner, I do not believe it is always or necessarily the best pedagogical or emotional choice for all children. In fact, I think for most it is a kind of compromise. Even in the best schools.

And yet -- I had some wonderful teachers as a child. I remember them with great affection and respect . I wouldn't be the person I am today without their support. And I am trusting that my daughter -- ostracized and lonely as she is -- might still benefit from building relationships with people like that. Adults who are different from me, who can complement what I can offer her.

This is the peculiar and ambivalent space I occupy as a parent, a citizen, and as a professional.

My position is quite different from that of people who support homeschooling for political or religious reasons (and possibly not for pedagogical ones.)