Did you say scombridae or scombridae?

I'm sure she wishes she had those 3 and a half minutes back.

That was terrible! BUT, children like this are the products of their parents personalities not the product of being homeschooled. This poor kid would be like this whether he was homeschooled or the class nerd at the local public school! The schooling choice would not change him. I think the old backwoods, denim dress, anti-social-nerd stereotype of homeschooling is dated and incorrect.

Pros:

1) Potentially better able to spell uncommon and infrequently used words

Cons:

1) Socially inept
2) Physically awkward
3) Unfortunate haircut
4) Impolite without realizing it
5) Poor conversationalist
6) Lifelong dependence on mother
7) Subway tuna fish considered edible

I guess the cons outweight the pros...

Allie -

As much as hip and socially aware products of homeschooling (I know, they seem so mutually exclusive!) would like the stereotype you mentioned to be either dated or incorrect, I'm afraid it still persists. It persists because a large number of homeschoolers still wear their long denim dresses with pride, and still read Bill Gothard's Institutes, and participate in every Vision Forum/Little House on the Prarie event. For good or bad, homeschooling is still largely associated (especially in the southeastern U.S.) as a conservative religious/political decision, which only exacerbates the social stigma you deny. Certainly homeschooling is more widely accepted than it was in the 80's and 90's, but I'd be hesitant to call it mainstream.

that made me feel embarrassed! poor kid....

1. it is funny.

2. some homeschoolers are socially inept.

3. some publicschoolers are socially inept.

4. some christianschoolers (and/or privateschoolers) are socially inept.

5. everyone was a dork at his age and didn't know how to face the cameras on a live tv show.

6. it was funny.

More like Evan O'Dorney shows a curious nation why HIS parents shouldn't homeschool your children. My parents did a damn fine job, thank you very much.

Paul, it's also an argument for why his parents shouldn't have been allowed to conceive.

Also, I dunno, I heard rumor you still play a ton of D&D. :)

homeschool kids are allowed to play d & d?

hahaha

I kind of enjoyed this...

While the kid was FATALLY AWKWARD, there are few things more entertaining than watching a totally flustered TV anchor.

All I gotta say is, boom goes the dynamite.

Quite possibly it could be an argument not to send your kid to spelling bees.

So if home schoolers are socially inept...Josiah and Micah, were you guys home schooled?

Kiko, those are just cultural differences. We're not socially inept to the locals.

I'd like to see the lot of us at eleven years old... home school or not most kids are devoid of social graces at that age.

Evan's problem is enhanced 1) because he's on national TV and 2) because he's distinctly unaware that he's socially awkward.

This guy will get married some day, his friends will have this tape (or some for of bio-digital file) and it will be the focal point of the reception.

"This guy will get married some day."

I wouldn't count on that.

Stinky P. - Josiah's married...

Ed, is it true you have every They Might Be Giants & Barenaked Ladies CD?

Actually, I own one TMBG CD from 1992 and exactly zero BNL CD's. Your point? :)

Correction - I own one TMBG cassette tape. Sorry I own zero CDs of the aforementioned bands.

Yes, with W.O.W. and everything else, Josiah is married. As is about 20 other guys I know that were as least as dorky as this kid is right now.

Ah, TMBG, what a great band. Everybody needs a little birdhouse in their soul...

Kiko -

Yes, I was home schooled, from the 3rd grade through my senior year of highschool. However, I've never claimed all home schoolers are/were socially inept. That said, a lot of them are. Hell, probably most of them. Thankfully, my parents made sure (especially when I was too young to pro-actively choose) that my home school experience was very different from the stereotypical one we all know and poke fun at. I had private tutors for many of my subjects, nothing was studied (especially in my college prep classes) from a biblical perspective, I was active in city sports programs, went to many proms with many girls, and was involved in just about every social activity that came my way (with the obvious exception of spelling bees). Even then, though, I knew my experience was not the norm, if for no other reason than meeting countless home schooled peers who fit the sheltered, naive, awkward mold perfectly. Needless to say, they weren't involved socially outside of home school activities. I'm not saying it's impossible to develop a personality and learn to interact with the rest of the world after 18 years of field trips to the creation museum or mom as teacher...it's just a whole lot harder.

All that to say, I'm still one half of a writing team interested in penning a Sex Ed. textbook for home schooled pre-teens (because, despite the evidence to the contrary, they have genitals too). If you're a publisher, we'd love to talk to you.

I wholeheartedly support homeschooling if a good education is your end goal - especially when you can't afford private school. But it can be damaging if your primary aim is to shelter the child from all the "evil secularism of the world."

I have many friends who were homeschooled for the former reason and they're awesome, well-rounded individuals. As for the latter...well those kids don't have friends.

It all goes back to the parents. There were a lot of incredibly awkward kids I knew growing up and their parents were weirdos too.

DavidM. at Age 11 = Awesome. I would have loved being on national TV.

Thomas Jefferson was home-schooled and he turned out pretty well.

Linsday Lohan was homeschooled in that movie Mean Girls and was awesome.

How sad that many of you do not see the true beauty of home education. The wordly school-social scene is not that beautiful. Believe me I was apart of it all, from cheerleader to sorority chic and every thing in between....home educated kids arent missing much! Seriously, its all so shallow and empty.

I think home education is beautiful! Education is discipleship, how amazing to disciple your children every day! I unfortunately was discipled by my peers and teachers who could care less.

I think we have to be careful how we judge other people, it is really unfair to label certain people as weird or awkward, that is so subjective. Each person's view of weird or awkward is different and often depends on your evironment. I personally think that people that wear tevas, band shirts and speak in cinical undertones are weird and awkward, but many of you here probably wouldn't agree!

Interesting topic!

Josiah,

Your right, I think Mean Girls was such an accurate portrayal of the public school versus homeschool worlds.

Public school is NOT real life! It is the antithesis of real socialization.

so much to say, but all i have time for is: josiah's comment made me laugh. thought i've never seen the movie, it made me laugh. thanks

Josiah, I wouldn't consider three hours a day "a lot" of D&D.

But more seriously, all this talk of homeschoolers and D&D got me thinking. I bet someone could take D&D gaming paraphanalia, substitute Old Testament prophet-types for wizards, dinosaurs for dragons, obscure Bible stories for gaming narratives, etc., and market it to the ever-growing homeschooling demographic.

"Ha-hah! I have obtained the Ox-Goad of Shamgar! My attacks henceforth carry triple the hit-points! Soon I shall be known as the Nephilim-slayer!!!"

Instead of "Dungeons & Dragons," we could call it "Sheol & Leviathan" or something.

Allie, I agree with you on the people who wear teva's. Also feel the same way about most folks who homeschool (and I've known/know many) and their weirdo kids.

Right now I've got an affection for both demographics (homeschool dorks + hippies), since I'm really into that Ron Paul guy for President, and it's a beautiful thing to see how he's uniting both those groups of people.

Finally, someone has figured out a way to unite the demographics in our population with the absolute worst hygiene: hippies, conservative homeschool dorks, and atheist libertarian computer geeks.

The End Times are at hand.

p.s. Paul, I'm pretty certain it's already been done!

Since we're talking about generalizations, here's one: It's really hard to be social at all if you honestly consider your education to be superior to the vast majority of the population. Which is an attitude many of the homeschooling parents I knew grewing up instilled, perhaps unintentionally, in their children. Going through life feeling as though the rest of your generation is inferiorly educated isn't really conducive to participating in civil society. A lack of TV-interview savvy is only a symptom.

That's a really brilliant observation Paul.

But what about we Jews? I'm certain I didn't get the best education, but, you know, chosen people and all that.

Tension tensions everywhere.

Chosen people isn't a problem I know how to solve. Indeed, a tension.

The problem with education is that it is a practical one as much as it is an ideological one, and by actively participating in it one shows a commitment to shared life in a community, a state, etc. Chosing to withdraw from the problem, whether through cash or homeschooling, strikes me as perpetuating it. Which is why I get irritated by senators who refuse to send their children to the public schools in their districts, even if I understand why they do it.

Perhaps its the fine line across which "tension" becomes "contradiction." The former is inevitable, but we should resist the latter.

I couldn't agree more with Paul's assessment.

I have encountered many such folks, and have even been the boss of some in years past, as well.

For everything they "know" they are WOEFULLY misinformed about other things "laymen" handle with ease -- and, as a result, are painfully awkward, annoyingly boastful, and slap-worthy.

In short, I would rather my child have a better mastery of being a respectful, patient, and caring adult than an intense knowledge of, say, literature or philosophy -- and the social skills of a box of rocks.

All things considered, there's a very good chance I will homeschool my son.

I was homeschooled until college, and have known several hundred homeschooled folks. In my experience, homeschooled kids aren't in general any more or less socially well-adjusted than public or Christian school kids. However, the ones who are maladjusted tend to be so in a very particular and recognizable way, unlike the non-homeschooled, who manifest their weirdness with greater diversity. I attribute the homeschooler sterotype to this uniformity of maladaption.

Bill's recent comment struck me as odd. Seemed like he was saying the non-homeschooled are more likely to be patient, caring, and respectful. That just seems false. No way are patience, care, and respect either taught or modeled by students in school more effectively than in homeschool. I'm not sayin homeschool necessarily kicks ass in this regard, but I know for a fact that those aren't the sort of virtues a kid is gonna pick up in the typical non-homeschool school career.

Here's a comment that a homeschooling advocate left on one of my blogs recently. I'm not saying I agree one way or the other, but I thought it'd add to an already interesting discussion.

Socialization - the buzz word that everyone who does not homeschool is so concerned about - is maybe the most important reason to homeschool. After we finish college, at age 21 or so, and even during college, nowadays - never again are we with our own same-age level peer group. Spending all day with children of the same age is what causes peer pressure, lack of respect for authority, and a growing away from family. Homeschoolers spend their days with children and adults of every age group, whether they are at home with their family or at activities where other families are participating.

One more thing (didn't realize what a homeschool zealot I was). Paul complains that homeschooling your kids instead of showing solidarity in your community by sending them to the sucky public schools only perpetuates the problem. OK, sure, but I wonder what problem you're trying to solve. The problem of bad public/corporate education, or the problem of how to raise your kids to be the kind of people they ought to be? We ought to care about both, but many people think that they can better raise their kids than can the currently sucky school system. Given that, those parents shouldn't sacrifice their kids' education in order to "help" the public education problem. There are better ways to increase interest in fixing the public schools (and show solidarity) than by sending your kids to school. The education of your kids seems just way too important to offer up as a token of communal good faith.

I'm not picking sides. I'm just saying I've seen very defined and repeated personality traits/results out of CERTAIN homeschoolers -- ones that I deem mostly negligible and would want to prevent in my own child's case should I be in that situation.

On the flip side, I've seen many more homeschooled kids without those traits. No matter whether you are homeschooled, private schooled, or public schooled, your parents' attitudes and behaviors in the midst of it are the NUMBER ONE influence on how you'll turn out afterwards. All educational situations can be good, and all can be bad. Depending how they're handled.

Going back to the original post, this child's parents have some issues. You can see it in their kid.

Paul Ned, I really don't think sending your kids to a public school means abdicating your authority and/or raising of your kids. It doesn't even necessarily imply they're going to be exposed to something "harmful" (whatever that means).

Consider Fairyland school on Lookout Mountain. It's a protectionist, whitebread, conservative school if there ever was one. And it's public.

Consider Battle Academy here in the Southside of Chattanooga: an incredibly diverse and by every measurable account a wonderful school that no sane Christian would have a problem evaluating and determining to be a great place to send their kids. Again, public.

Normal Park school. Chattanooga School for the Arts & Sciences. And so on.

My point is that it's silly (and woefully inaccurate) to speak about Public v. Homeschooling in some kind of absolute, deterministic sense. It's meaningless to do so.

In Chattanooga there are public and private schools that provide a better education, in every sense, than a kid can get a home.

"Education" isn't a national political problem. It's a local problem that can be evaluated and addressed in very real and tangible ways. It isn't an abstraction. The best "education" will always be a community thing (with the individual supported by his/her family), which is why mankind has always moved that direction when it came to formal education.

Paul Ned,

You ask if the problem I refer to is "the problem of bad public/corporate education, or the problem of how to raise your kids to be the kind of people they ought to be?" The REAL problem is that we see this as a dichotomy, or, as you say, two separate problems, which leads people to then withdraw from the first because they see the second as "more important." In other words, the private/family TRUMPS the public/communal. (Carry that logic far enough, you get Tony Soprano.) When one's education is founded on that principle ("no matter what happens to everyone else, MY kids are going to have a good education") it seems inevitable that one will have a less-than-optimal attitude toward the society at large. That, to me, creates a major barrier to developing a strong community. So more is at stake than a "token of communal good faith."

Of course, when push comes to shove, I understand why people make that choice (as I said in my reference to senators sending their kids to private school). But the choice rests on some fairly large theoretical and philosophical attitudes, and THOSE attitudes are consequential.

If you think that "raising one's kids best" is the only problem, then my objections aren't valid. But if you think that "raising one's kids best" INCLUDES developing them to participate actively in a polis, then the means of that education will become a factor.

But at this point we've come rather far from my initial comment, which is all I really wanted to say, since I need to get back to working on a syllabus.

Homeschooling itself doesn't necessarily propigate good kids, but it may be a sign that the parents care about about the kid's lives as well as their education.

As a public school kid, married to a xian school girl with numerous home school kids around I've found few ways to differentiate them. What seems to matter more in their achievement and behavior is how much their folks loved them.

We have one (soon to be two) of our kids in Battle (I love the name of this school) this fall. In general the teachers are good, but what makes the school better is that parents seem to be involved with their kids education. They haven't been handed over to the school system.

Parents can choose to opt out of any schooling process. I've seen too many, but I'm sure there are some crappy home school situations out there. And sure, a private school can hold kids to a higher standard, but if the parents are apathetic and distant what kind of kid do you think comes out of that institution?

Sara and I used to fret about all of this crap but found some resolution in it all by acknowledging that if our kids where in a challenging and safe place, what we did in the home would make the difference.

Scott - great quote and so true!

Josiah - Great choice for president, Ron Paul is fantastic!

Ok, I only watched half and this kid is killing me!! I went to public school K-12 and there were at least half a dozen kids I can recall off the top of my head that were at least this socially awkward if not more. That's off the top my head after 8 years, so there was plenty more to be sure.
Definitely the parents to blame on this one. I know many homeschoolers and none of them are as socially awkward as this kid.
Socially awkward parents, its gotta be.

Josiah,

I never said sending your kids to school is complete abdication of authority/guidance. But doing so IS abdication of parental guidance for the better part of 180 weekdays per year. Of course, that doesn't mean that in some cases school isn't the better option--which I would never deny. I just said that some parents face a choice between an educationally and morally inferior school or keeping their kids at home. You can't deny that's true. And in those cases--and even in the cases where the comparison of school to home is pretty close--parents are clearly justified in schooling their kids themselves, if they think they can do better. Again, I never said homeschooling is the only way to go. I agree completely that there are plenty of schools out there that can give kids a better education than most of the parents out there. Furthermore, some parents just don't got the skills, if you know what I mean.

Where I think you're tragically, perniciously wrong is when you say that the best education will always be a community thing. Maybe, IDEALLY, it ought to be so--in the New Jerusalem or something. But in real life, it isn't. Many, many American schools are woefully inadequate at educating kids--either academically or morally. And in those numerous instances, there will be plenty of families around such schools that rightly and wisely opt to teach at home.

Paul,

If you're not too busy, I think I need to hear more about why you think there's some problem with distinguishing and prioritizing family and polis differently. Because that there is an obvious distinction and need for prioritization seems really obvious to me.

But even if there's not an important diff between them, it still seems really obvious that much of the time homeschooling is the right call to make. There's a whole heck of a lot more to the polis than just our public schools. Since many schools abjectly fail in educating folks, parents who take responsibility and pick up the schools' slack are actually doing more to prepare their kids for community contribution than by leaving them to stagnate in mediocrity or worse. Poll some typical public school kids and find out how they spend their 8 hours/day in school, and decide if they're being educated to become true "citizens". Or, instead, are they socially marginalized by cliques, bored by equally bored and unqualified teachers, pressured and morally influenced by the radically different sexual mores of their peers, regarded as weird if they express genuine curiosity toward their studies, numbed by the hours of classtime wasted every day due to undisciplined classmates, saddled with homework for their few wakeful hours away from school, calcified into interrelational patterns only appropriate for other people within one year of their age, etc.?

I'm not saying homeschool is the only way, or even that it's usually the best way. But it seems to me to be truth up there with the shape of the earth that homeschooling is often the best and most rational choice for parents who care about the polis AND the development of their children both.

Paul Ned,

re: abdication. So is leaving your kid alone in his/her room. So what?

Sure some parents are in the position where teaching at home is the only "good" option, but in my limited experience that has not been the case.

Yes Paul, "Best" implies ideal. Furthermore, it's my contention that it doesn't take much for the quality of a public education to quickly surpass the quality of the average homeschool education. If community & group education was so damn bad folks, including homeschoolers, wouldn't be trying to go to College with other people, including in the pursuit of their graduate degrees.

My apologies to those students for whom their parents and/or one professor in their home couldn't teach them everything they needed to know for a quality education and were "forced" to commune with others. You might find this the exception; I'm inclined to think it's closer to the norm, and it isn't a bad thing.

Josiah writes: "Furthermore, it's my contention that it doesn't take much for the quality of a public education to quickly surpass the quality of the average homeschool education"

So NOT true! You need to read John Taylor Gatto's book "Dumbing us Down".

Paul Ned, your so right on this!

I've read Gatto's book. It came in my "Conservative Ghetto-Presbyterian" starter kit, along with "The Fruit of Her Hands" by Doug Wilson, "Competent to Counsel" by Jay Adams, Mary Pride's "The Way Home", "Braveheart" on VHS, "Patriarchy Made Simple" from Vision Forum, and the "How To Split A Church & Have Bad Hygiene in 8 Simple Steps" anthology.

The ease at which group education surpasses the quality of homeschooling isn't indicative of how good public education is, but just how deficient homeschooling is.

what it comes down to for me:

your kids will spend much more time in the classroom during the week than practically anywhere else. who do you want them to spend that time with?

Zing! I hope that starter kit included the "Anne of Green Gables" collection, as well as a food dehydrator. Oh, and one of these shirts...because piety and paranoia shouldn't be contained to long sleeves.

Pithy and supercilious... gotta love it Josiah, gotta love it.

For seemingly being so well rounded you sure like entrenched positions.

Supercilious. S-U-P-E-R-C-I-L-I-O-U-S. Supercilious.

I've always been partial to Ann of Avonlea, if only because Dave Foley from Kids in the Hall is in it.

But you're right Micah, if you don't homeschool your child the gay, black, drug addicted, atheist, anti-headcovering, democrat, pro-France (which I guess is cool now), pentecostal unitarian jewish psychologist pornographers will kill your child It's just a fact. With lots of truthiness to boot.

Dave, supercilious doesn't come close.

As I read this line of discussion, I find the stereotypes of public schooling as disturbing - if not more so - than the stereotypes of homeschooling. My family was one of those strange families who did all three – public, private, and homeschooling. My parents made the decision independently for each child based on our particular needs, meaning that most of my education was in the public sector with three years (middle school) in the private. My siblings were both home schooled for a few years, but finished high school at our local public school. I have always been incredibly grateful to my parents for sending me to public school – and in no way did my education suffer for it.

See, in my opinion, the crux of the “public school deficiencies” argument rests on a false assumption – that education is the responsibility of the school. In my experience, my education was determined by my desires as a student and the encouragement of my parents. A great education was mine for the taking – but I had to want it. Yes, while my classmates and I were completing our first year of college during public school class hours (and many of them went on to Ivy League Schools), there were other students in my school who couldn’t read. Was this the fault of the school or the public education system? Did it mean that my high school didn’t have qualified teachers or provide a stellar education? No. The issue is far more complex, involving many community factors – such as the fact that a third of my school’s first language was Spanish. However, by intermixing with people of extremely diverse backgrounds, I feel like my public education prepared me much more fully for life after college (since my college experience was in the Christian Ghetto). Non-Christians weren’t an abstract argument; they were my friends. The poor were my peers. I learned a lot from those who were different than me – and few aspects of that experience were negative. They didn’t lead me astray. On the contrary, they strengthened my faith as I had to wrestle with whether or not I truly believed what I professed – and taught me humility as I realized that it was only by God’s grace that I had the advantages in life that I had.

Anyway, I felt the need to provide some small defense of public schools…

Josiah, with a textbook, you could teach pretty much any kid any subject up until the later high school years. But most folks can't do this with college-level material. That's why homeschoolers send their kids to college. It's not homeschooling families hypocritically revealing that they actually do think communal education is better.

You say "The ease at which group education surpasses the quality of homeschooling isn't indicative of how good public education is, but just how deficient homeschooling is."

That's a bold claim. Why do you, or should anyone, think that's true? My experience certainly hasn't borne that out. Homeschoolers average 50 pts higher on the SATs than do everybody else (not that the SAT is the be-all, end-all of educational success, by any means, but it is genuine data that makes your wild claim about the deficiency of homeschooling that much harder to believe.). You and I both knew plenty of well-educated homeschoolers at Covenant. So I guess I'm wondering why you have beef with homeschooling.

So far, it just sounds like you don't like the overall ideological bent of the homeschooling movement. But that's no reason to think homeschooling is bad in principle. It's only a contingent fact that most homeschoolers are strongly ANTI- "gay, black, drug addicted, atheist, anti-headcovering, democrat, pro-France (which I guess is cool now), pentecostal unitarian jewish psychologist pornographers." You are free to homeschool your own kids your way and change all that.

For the record, I just want to reiterate that I think that in many cases public or private school is the best way to go, a la Rebekah. I think she's dead right that so much of that depends on the nature of the individual child.

*burp* I've seen "The Man from Snowy River" 600 times. *fart*

supercilious seemed nicer, would arrogant work better?

The Man From Snowy River is weak and impotent compared to every home schooled boy's best friend Jeremiah Johnson.

yep, i was public school until high school. would have stayed public had the school i was supposed to attend (tyner high) wasn't so dangerous. consider this: at the middle school (directly across a two-lane street from the high school), the cops were there at least once a week. and they were there for enforcement, not to keep kids from doing things. most of the kids there were having sex. they smoked in the bathroom. they even kept cigs behind their ears like they were pencils--and no one said anything.

and it was great.

as rebekah stated, these years (though i didn't know it at the time) were when i was learning to be an outsider. i was a christian in a dying school. and practically all of my friends were not christians. of course, they claimed to be christians, and they were decent people, so mom and dad didn't have a problem with me running around with them and bringing them over to the house.

that didn't really go anywhere, but..

i also agree with whoever said you make your education (w/ the help of your parents, i guess). whereas some think the best education comes from dropping some serious dough, others realize the same education can come at home or at public school. just depends on if the kid cares enough.

Josiah -

I think your ignorance on this subject has been amply demonstrated - perhaps you need to revisit this topic when you actually have children or when you have decided to not just mock those who are different than you. It's disappointing that you've backed yourself into another indefensible corner, especially when this post started off with you publicly mocking an accomplished child who had the guts to perform at his best on a national stage when the eyes of the world were on him. He seems comfortable in his own skin and his parents are willing to encourage his interests and help him achieve his goals. Just because he doesn't conform to some measure of sophistication doesn't mean that he should conform. I thought people were supposed to celebrate individuality. Does everyone need to act the same? It seems like you're following the advice of Homer Simpson, "the first rule of the playground is always make fun of those different than you."

I'm surprised that you, of all people, have become the voice for conformity and stamping out individuality. There's a place in this world for people like him and I'm glad that folks like that exist. It's people like him that develop new medicines or discover new areas of physics or become brilliant musicians. Shouldn't he be encouraged?

Overall, I really think that most of what has been thrown out here show more about peoples prejudices than they do about homeschoolers. Overally, I think this post belittles you more than it does him.

Rebekah is great.

Paul, I'm sure you understand the inherent problems w/ the homeschooling vs. public schooling statistics. Nevermind that we're leaving out the entire private school sector (which many homeschoolers refuse to or cannot send their children to for ideological or financial reasons).

And you know as well as I do just how "good" an education is that is based solely in a textbook.

I'd argue that a problem both of our public schools and homeschoolers is that we've lowered the bar so far in our elementary and highschool educational curriculum that 99% of what's taught is done from a textbook doing "overviews". This is one of those places where I respect the whole Classical school movement (which qualification).

Further, nevermind that a homeschool education cannot compete with the non-textbook resources a School has: labs, after school programs, athletics, the AEC, etc. It's why organizations like Rebekah's Lakeland Study Center exist. It's also why homeschoolers, public, and private schoolers send their kids there. It's a beautiful thing.

My point isn't that homeschooling is inherently bad. My point is that done right, group schooling has a much higher "quality education" ceiling that homeschooling. Surely you can agree with that?

p.s. Ed you're right, just because a kid is a dork doesn't mean they don't have a role to play. If I implied otherwise, I apologize. They occasionally make great software engineers and Blockbuster Video employees.

Also, can I borrow your copies of On Our Own and Rigoletto?

Gose, when I was a kid I wanted to _be_ the man from Snowy River.

Paul Ned, my point about community vs. family was an attempt to point out some of the ideological assumptions that underlie some of the choices that some homeschoolers make. This is a really big issue, something I've been thinking about lately, not something I have perfectly worked out. But I would say the larger issue is not confined to HS, or even this country. While I agree that different levels of investment and prioritization take place, and should take place, I think it is difficult to retain social health if all of the members of society are committed to their families AGAINST other members of the society, as opposed to, say, being ultimately committed to justice. The end result is, invariably, identity politics. In other words, if the be-all and end-all of my public life is the health and well-being of my family, then all my political efforts will be for their good, even if that comes at the cost of others.

Now, I'm NOT saying that the family can't be motivation for the general good. Many people get together for the good of their communities precisely because a healthy neighborhood is a fine place to raise one's kids. But I do think there is a limit to that motivation.

I agree completely with you that public schooling as such is not necessarily the best place to raise a citizen. I see that as a major problem, and one that everyone should be committed to addressing (not "fixing" because education is always a crisis, and should be, but that's another matter altogether). My point, however, was that in my exposure to many HS families, the ideological underpinning was precisely family over everything else, even if it was in the name of "the best education for my kids." (Remember, I started my comments with the point that we are talking in generalizations, so of course there are many exceptions). And, if that is the environment in which the education is taking place, it seems that Family trumping Community is the general message being sent. Which means "socialization" on a much more profound level is at stake.

This is a bit long, but allow me to offer a practical example of where I see this, in my own experience, playing out. There is a tendency among HS (as much as there is a tendency among society at large) to emphasize competition as evidence of superior education: we win the spelling bees, we get the best SAT scores, we read at levels far above the national average. Great, but to what end? HS families don't always articulate the end. On the other hand, as much as I loath the elitism that often goes with private academies and Ivy league schools, there is at least a gesturing toward the fact that great educational privilege comes with great responsibility, and that you, our student, are being trained to be a leader, to show a fundamental commitment to the good of society as a whole. Now, I have no illusions about Yale and Harvard grads, that they actually DO this, and I know they are as interested in wealth and prestige as everyone else. But I think that the logic of social commitment is there.

Can HSing families cultivate the same degree of commitment? I think so. But, in my own experience, do they, and do their fundamental ideological underpinnings foster those commitments? Not that I have seen.

Josiah Writes:
"I've read Gatto's book. It came in my "Conservative Ghetto-Presbyterian" starter kit, along with "The Fruit of Her Hands" by Doug Wilson, "Competent to Counsel" by Jay Adams, Mary Pride's "The Way Home", "Braveheart" on VHS, "Patriarchy Made Simple" from Vision Forum, and the "How To Split A Church & Have Bad Hygiene in 8 Simple Steps" anthology."----"They occasionally make great software engineers and Blockbuster Video employees."

WOW! Why are you so mean and bitter? Its just not healthy! After the Ron Paul comment, I was going to tell my brother that you werent so bad after all, but now, I dont know. :)

I used to HATE homeschooling also, until
I had a child, and went through a 3 year research and study on public schools. The education at the good schools are sub-par at best. If you intereview teachers (which I did) they will tell you their hands are tied and all they are allowed to do is get the kids to memorize facts to pass the tests.

My goal is for my children NOT to be clones on a conveyor belt memorizing facts, and being exactly what the govt. wants them to be. But, instead to LOVE to learn and to grow their curtiosity and creativity. I am an artist, so growing creativity is very important to me. Public schools kill creativity, and ruin any love of learning or "thinking for yourself" attitudes.

I am sorry that many of you apparently have met some pretentious, "dorky" homeschoolers. But please dont judge home education based on that, it really is a beautiful thing!

To suppliment Josiah's reference to the "Lakeland Study Center," I thought I'd provide the link (it's actually the Cambridge Study Center in Lakeland, FL). I had the priviledge my senior year of high school of taking their supplimentary Thoughts Captive class in addition to my regular public school education. What I found really neat about it was how my two literature courses (one at my public school and one in a mostly homeschoolish fashion with a class of 3-4) overlapped and fed into each other. Neither was "better" than the other - just different.

Josiah,

I'm not sure what your point is with those movies - i'd never even heard of them.

Regarding you're statement, "group schooling has a much higher "quality education" ceiling that homeschooling." where in the world are you getting that? I don't understand that at all and would completely disagree. And I say that as someone who spent elementary school in some of the finest public schools around and middle/high school in an excellent private school. I've seen them both from the inside and have problems with both of them. Of course, I'll admit that I've got skin in this game as we home school our children (and they even participate in the spelling bee). But we're really happy with the quality of education our children get and believe that they have opportunities that they would never have if they were in a school somewhere. It allows them to work with children of various ages moreso than at school. It allows them to persue subjects that interest them to a level that would never be possible inside of a traditional school (not because a traditional school is bad, but because there is just much more time available). I spent most of my time (particularly in public school) in school bored. They could not offer material that challenged me individually because there is not enough time for the teacher to develop an individual learning plan for each student. With homeschool, you have that ability.

Back to Evan - how do you think he would be treated if he wasn't home schooled? Do you think he would be as excited about learning as he is? Do you think his talents would be as well developed at a standard school. (I watched the vignette they did on him during the actual spelling bee finals - he has real musical talent, beyond just playing.) Kids like Evan can thrive with individual attention, but in a school environment are inevitibly bullied, teased and mocked. He has time to develop as a person without much of that kind of bad influence and eventually, he'll mature and be a better person for this experience. It's not hard for me to imagine Bill Nye or Conan O'Brien being every bit as awkward at that age. Do you really think that he would be better off going to a public school? Really?

Regardless, I still think that the mocking of this kid reflects much more poorly on you than it does on Evan O'Dorney, Josiah.

When Allie writes "my goal is for my children NOT to be clones on a conveyor belt memorizing facts, and being exactly what the govt. wants them to be," I'm afraid she might also be on the lookout for black helicopters and is often overheard quoting something she read in the latest John Birch Society newsletter. Hopefully that's not the case, but I really don't believe the government has formed a clever little plot to turn children in robots. Saying so just sounds silly and isolationist.

Finally, my wife, the public school teacher, would disagree with your hyperbolic contention that public school 1) kills creativity, 2) ruins one's love of learning, and 3) strips students of their ability to think for themselves. It turns out that just the opposite is true.

i say kids will become robots at home, public, or private school. when i taught (at a public school), some kids got it, some didn't. some worked hard to wrap their brains around concepts and discuss them intelligently--others didn't.

and just think, had josiah not made fun of a little kid, we would have never had this conversation!

this is my america.

Allie, I was homeschooled for a number of years, and also homeschooled three boys for a year on behalf of a friend of mine who's wife was dying of cancer. We used a number of homeschool "brands". Fun stuff.

If my liking of Ron Paul was enough to sway your opinion, maybe your kids are better off in government schools.

Again, education is not some big "national" issue. It's very, very local. You can know your school board members, your local elected officials, principles, teachers, and superintendents. It's not hard to be connected and aware of the world immediately around you. In doing so, you're actually in a position to evaluated which option is best for your child, not by listening some unscientific and ideologically biased tape series from this years Jim & Tammy Baker.

Ed, that's funny, because when I watched that video, I thought it was you as a child.

Ed,
Your post was right on. Many children especially smart, creative children are generally bored in public school.
Not every child learns the same, especially creative types. And Boys do not learn the same as girls. So why do we teach them the same?

Micah- You sound like you are in that "bitter" club with Josiah. Were'nt you the prom-going homeschooler from earlier? You must not have like your homeschooling experience, I'm sorry.

I do not know who John Birch is. I looked up his website, I am assuming they are a group that doesnt like big govt socialist? Not sure. But I did not get my information from him. I know public school teachers as well and they share a different story. So do many Freshman college professors that are grievous at the fact that many freshman dont know HOW to think. They know facts and information, but they dont know what to do with it.

It all comes down to the fact that we can choose to do the best for our children! I love home education and I think it is the best for my children. They are free to learn as fast as they want to and be as creative as they want. I am thankful that I have a chance to disciple them and teach them.

Oh Allie...while I almost appreciate your zeal, I'm mostly tired of your assertion (for a second time), that people who don't think as highly of home schooling as you do, or who question its effectiveness, are somehow bitter. You're silly and misinformed to think that, because I offer critiques of home schooling, I therefore had to have had a bad experience. As before, the opposite is true. I enjoyed being home schooled, but as I explained above, my home school experience was atypical of the ones most commonly accepted, especially in conservative christian circles (i.e. Vision Forum). Secondly, home schooling was a decent preperation for college, but compared to peers who went to public or private school, mine was no better, and in some ways (e.g. mathematics) worse. Those years of home schooling gave me a legitimate lens with which to view, as well as critique, home schooling. I don't think you're able to bring that perspective to the table, so when you write as such, I tend to not take it very seriously.

School is as good as the teacher and as good as that teacher has the time to teach.

Micah's wife may be a wonderful teacher, have wonderful kids with parents who support their education. This is winning situation and those kids are better for it.

Is it possible that a great teacher can be in a difficult environment and good teaching is problematic? Of course. Does that make them a bad teacher - no, but the situation created a poor learning atmosphere and the kids come out learning/becoming less.

Is is possible that a teacher can be inadequate? Yes. Is it possible that a child is simply not a good student? Yes.

Any of these scenarios can be applied to any learning environment and have nearly identical results.

What the home school proponents are indicating is that they'd rather take the chance themselves then place it in the hands of others.

Do I personally take this chance, no, but my child is doing well in public school. Would I hesitate to take them out if they weren't? Not for a moment.

As parents we love our kids, do we think for a moment that anyone here with kids hasn't mulled over the best possible learning environment for them?

Josiah, to put it bluntly, do you believe the Sunders somehow stopped being reasonable/loving parents and intentionally or inadvertently placed their kids in a stymied and deficient learning environment? Could you seriously look Betsy in the eye and say "The ease at which group education surpasses the quality of home schooling isn't indicative of how good public education is, but just how deficient home schooling is."

Hey Dave, you make some great points. I'm with you all the way.

As to the Betsy thing: No, but I would Ed. I've never talked with Besty.

I first became interested in Battle when you told me you were sending your eldest there. I do my best to keep tabs on how it's doing, and it's really a fascinating school. I'm excited to see if it can be duplicated (in some sense) at the new elementary here in the Southside. Could be a beautiful thing...

Micah,
I am sorry, you must have misunderstood. I do not think you are bitter because you dont like homeschooling. I thought you were bitter because your comments in general seemed cynical and bitter. Maybe thats just how you all talk in Chattanooga:). My apologies.

If you dont like homeschooling, its ok. My goal is not to change your mind, but just to stand up for those that do homeschool. And share the beauty I see in it! I unfortunately was not homeschooled, so no I dont know that side from a students perspective, just as you dont really know the non-homeschooling side (from a students perspective). The point is to choose the best education for our children and to walk in obedience to Christ with the job of raising them. Not sure if you have children, if not you will understand better what I am saying when that first child comes along.

And Josiah, no my children would not be better off in a govt. school, but at least you called it for what it is! The statment about Ron Paul was just a joke, sorry you misunderstood.

I just can't understand why you all get so riled up about this subject. Maybe you were the exact thing growing up that you now loath? But I dont really see how that was so bad in the scheme of things.

OK, that is all I am commenting on. I am turning into some blogging nerd! Thanks for the interesting debate!

Anon -

It couldn't have been me - my voice hadn't changed by that age and I actually missed my first word in the spelling bee when I was a kid.

Josiah -

So are you going to say that? And mean it? I don't think so. Frankly, you're just in snide mode now, making fun of defenseless kids and others. You really don't know what you're talking about. I pity you. You've dug yourself into a hole again.

Ed, with you as their champion, they're not defenseless! Don't sell yourself short. Also, being willing to say "The ease at which..." isn't the same as thinking, or "believing" as Dave put it, that your or anyone else's homeschooling is somehow deficient. There is a distinction (not that it makes me any less snide); also, don't think I wasn't in your "hole" in the first place.

I'm certain you and Betsy are rock n' roll homeschool parents. I do think there's a serious deficiency if you teach your children to build their websites using tables. You will be held accountable for doing so on Judgment Day.

Allie -

1) I'm in Atlanta.
2) My wife and I have a daughter.
3) We don't consider home schooling a viable educational alternative for her in the strict sense of going to school at home (although I think we all agree that learning happens - as it should - at home too), but would rather invest in our community, see the local public schools thrive, and actively live out our calling there.
4) The you-loathe-that-which-you-once-were argument is really no different than the bunch-of-bitter-boys line from earlier. I'm not buying it, but your arm chair psychology is entertaining!
5) After being home schooled I did actually go on to college, giving me a pretty good idea of what that experience is like. It was nice. I enjoyed the classes and debates. Professors were mostly friendly. I joined a fraternity. Drank a lot. It was nice.
6) Ron Paul has the same chance Ross Perot or Ralph Nader did.
7) I'm not riled up, and I don't think Josiah is. I'm certainly not interested in changing your mind, but I have also enjoyed kicking these ideas around with you.

I could only watch the first minute of this video - too awkward! As for homeschooling...eh. The only reason I wouldn't do it is because I would suck at teaching.

Josiah -

I don't think the fate will be as horrible as those who re-use IDs in CSS. Because those people are neither hot nor cold.

As far as being in a hole, your defensiveness is evidence enough that you know you're in over your head.

My point is that this post belittles you far more than it does Evan. The post is petty, misinformed, beligerent and reasonably offensive and I'd expect better from you. I think it's pretty clear that you really can't justify this post or the positions you've advocated in it. But I'd really like to hear why you think it's okay to write posts like this.

Ed, it makes sense in certain situations to re-use ID's, especially when dealing with javascript shenanigans. Just like in certain situations you have to use tables. Just like in certain situations you have to homeschool your kids.

Are dorky homeschoolers absolved of ever having to be laughed at? I don't even grant myself that right. Tell me why I should (the homeschoolers that is).

Just because you can rationalize re-using IDs doesn't make it right. It's a CSS sin and a grevious one.

It's not about them, it's about you. Mocking vulnerable people who are in no position to defend themselves is wrong. It's essentially bullying. I would have thought that would be obvious to you.

Homeschooling sounds like fun, but my guess is that other homeschooling parents would ban their kids from socializing with my daughter, who would still learn evolution, banned books, and secular math.

So that gives me pause.

No Man,

Other than the fact that even as a Christian I will expect my kids to learn evoluntionary theories (public school or otherwise) I have to ask what is secular math? Is this a Fundi term?

Also, where can I find a good list of banned books? Are we talking Chaucer and Whitman? The Chrisatin Bible was banned in my school, but I suppose anyone can create such a list.

lol, you're a CSS developer now? It's about time. Welcome to the post-dot-bomb web. You should also consider getting one of these. Being patronizing never helped anyone. I'll let you borrow my copy of The Incredibles.

Well, you'd be surprised about what I know about CSS...

So now what you're saying is that bullying is only not funny if you don't have a sense of humor? Ha ha, it's all a joke? I don't think so. If you want people to take you seriously, then you need to not treat them with disrespect (you may have noticed I've said this kind of thing to you before).

I'm not patronizing you - I'm trying to appeal to the better angels of your nature and get you to realize that this kind of post is wrong.

I believe you know that it's wrong, but enjoy it too much to stop yourself from doing this. You should hold yourself to a higher standard.

You should also be willing to back up what you say and answer peoples questions.

Alright, you're right Ed. I would be surprised.

But seriously, it's gonna be ok. Nobody is saying you're a bad parent for homeschooling your kids. Take a moment to relax. You have every right to raise your kids however you want, and, if you need my affirmation (which I doubt) I think you're doing a damn fine job. Let's hug it out.

Reusing IDs is a CSS sin - so true.

However, so is not including a DOCTYPE on your page, failing to specify a charset, or not including an ALT attribute with your IMG elements. Don't even get me started on the use spacer gifs, tables for layout (nested three-deep no less), misspelling Chattanooga in your keywords meta tag, etc.

http://3hd.com/

In Ed's defense, "chattanoog" is a pretty hotly contested keyword, one that folks have been trying to steal away from Andy for a long time.

*grin* You have a way of stirring up interesting topics, Josiah! I've enjoyed reading the discussion so far.

One question I had was when you said, "The best 'education' will always be a community thing..."

When I was homeschooled (all the way till I went to Covenant!), there were fewer options for parents as far as creating a homeschool community. Watching homeschoolers I know growing up today, it seems like it has become much easier for homeschooling to be community based, at least for parents who choose to take that route. There are groups of homeschool parents--almost like co-ops--who will hire a teacher for a group of students, especially for difficult to teach classes. People in churches lend a hand--someone who was an English teacher or a chemistry teacher will teach a group class once a week. I know of a widower in a church who has a girl (an only child) getting to be school age. The homeschool families will take her into their homes while he's at work, and teach her along with their own children.

Sometimes even public schools or community colleges will lend a hand, allowing homeschoolers to join sports teams, or take a few classes.

So, I feel like today especially (but for motivated families from the beginning), homeschooling can definitely be a "community thing."

One very attractive thing about homeschooling is that the parent--and kids--have many choices as far as designing a curriculum/lifestyle that suits each child. So, homeschooling, the only option? No. The best option? Not always!! But an inherently socially repressive option? Not at all--it depends on the parents, children, and other factors.

Interesting discussion going on here, but I see lots of blaming the parents for this child's social awkwardness.

I would be willing to bet money that this kid has Asperger's Syndrome, it's on the autism spectrum, and a lot of times the kids that have it might be really proficient in certain areas (such as spelling) but lack social skills in a painfully obvious way!

Heidi whoever you are, you stole the words right out of my mouth. The more I watch this video, the more this kid reminds me of a friend with Asperger's. My bets are with you.

amen Heidi.