While citizens should have the freedom to homeschool their children, in the same way they should be free to choose private schools over public schools, that does not mean there are no disadvantages to such a choice, to individuals and society at large.
There are some 2 million homeschooled children in the United States today, roughly 3% of students. Parents cite several reasons for homeschooling their children, including the desire to provide “religious and moral instruction,” a “concern about the school environment,” and “dissatisfaction with the academic instruction” at schools. A 2009 Department of Education report revealed 83% of homeschool parents held providing religious instruction as one of their reasons for partaking in this practice, which is largely unregulated — you can teach kids anything, or nothing at all. Almost 70% of homeschool families are white. This is mostly still the white, conservative Christian movement it was when it launched in the 1980s, though it is becoming more diverse: there are more minority families now, more people choosing this route not because of religion but because of factors like racism in schools or the sad state of many poorly-funded city districts. However, the words of President Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council still categorize the phenomenon:
As a homeschooling parent myself, I understand the desire to give children an environment that affirms traditional values. The government has eliminated God from the classroom and too often replaced Him with an anti-life, anti-family curriculum that misses life’s deepest meaning.
Again, parents have the right to think this way and keep their children at home. But the central disadvantage of homeschooling lies in its very purpose. The true danger isn’t that kids will be isolated or socially inept; a few may, but most homeschool children participate in sports, organizations, and other social outlets (though it’s not as extensive as being among peers 8 hours a day or having instant access to a broad array of free clubs, societies, and teams). Children being homeschooled against their will is problematic, as it can breed resentment against parents, but that is not universal either. The real problem is that children are primarily exposed to a single worldview. And of course that is the whole point. The point is to limit knowledge (of science, sex, gays, atheism, and so on) and enforce an extremely narrow perspective — the opposite of education.
We should want our children to learn many different things from many different people. We should seek a wider base of knowledge and perspective. Consider how many teachers one has in a public K-12 education: perhaps 50-60. Each of these teachers has his or her own worldview and life experience and learning, job history, travels, religion, political beliefs, ethnicity, sexual orientation, economic background — and, importantly, degree in education or other academic field. No reasonable person would suggest one or two parents, no matter how well-educated, could provide the depth of knowledge that 60 people with specialized degrees and experience could in chemistry, mathematics, the arts, history, English, and everything else. There is a reason that we see multiple teachers daily from 5th or 6th grade up, rather than just one: covering all subjects in any advanced fashion is a task no one person should have or could possibly be qualified for. And different viewpoints, of course, helps students think deeper and grow more tolerant of others.
This is not to say homeschool education can’t be successful — homeschool students often excel in college and have strong ACT/SAT scores before that, as any child receiving one-on-one, individualized instruction should — but an education will not be as complete or well-rounded if coming from a single person with a single worldview. I write from personal experience. Knowledge will be lacking or denounced, and diverse perspectives unknown. If parents don’t want to teach a subject, for any reason — perhaps they don’t know Spanish or understand calculus, or think sex ed is the devil’s work — they can skip it entirely. And what a shame that homeschooled students have nearly no chance of learning about the world from a Muslim or Marxist, no chance of seeing things from different angles and thinking critically. To me it’s a shame, to others it’s the point. Instead, students get a parent, which at best means instruction from someone less qualified than those collective dozens with actual degrees across all subjects, and at worst outright lies about the world (anti-evolution, anti-climate change) or intolerance toward certain people (homosexuals, trans Americans). One can easily experience high SAT scores alongside many skipped subjects and a blindness to other points of view.
One might make a similar point about the social value of having more extensive interaction with diverse students. Instead of primary interaction with siblings or other homeschooled children who hold the same religious, conservative ideas, wouldn’t it better prepare students for a diverse world, and help them think critically from multiple viewpoints, if they interacted daily with Hindus, atheists, and African Americans? This is not to say homeschooled students don’t meet and befriend such kids at scouts, ballet, or football, but public school classrooms provide much longer, broader interactions, in an academic environment. There is value in that.
We value the integration and interaction of public schooling over homeschooling for the same reason we value integration and interaction over racially segregated classrooms. As I write in my book:
Integration is our hope because it is only through interaction that we come to know the Other. Separation and isolation is a breeding ground for misunderstanding, misjudgment, fear, and hostility. Interaction is diminishing arrogance and eradicating hatred at every moment. White soldiers of the Civil War forsook prejudice and assisted their black comrades to relocate when the cannons finally quieted because they had served with and befriended those men of color. Religious fundamentalists come to accept homosexuals when they find themselves sitting next to each other and conversing. Young students’ fear of special needs children fades away the longer they share a classroom. Integration serves a moral and social purpose.
The public school classroom provides the most direct interaction of diverse students, encouraging acceptance and understanding. The primary reason to reject homeschooling is the primary reason to support public schooling.
Public schooling is a precious creation. Our tax dollars should provide equally and adequately funded schools that are free and open to the public, contingent only on geographic location. Geographic location is not perfect, as our living arrangements and thus our schools are still very much divided by race and class, but it provides the best opportunity for students to learn with and from others of all political persuasions, religions, sexual orientations, races, income levels, and more. Interaction and integration will breed peace and understanding, as it always does. That is what I want my tax dollars to build and what I think students need to experience, not private, corporate-controlled, or home education. There are still many other challenges, such as eliminating high-stakes testing or expanding democratic control of standards, but public education is worth preserving if we desire a more tolerant society.
For more from the author, subscribe and follow or read his books.
