It’s always a welcome development when a notable journal decides to devote an entire issue to homeschooling. This has been done only a very few times. Back in 2000 the prestigious Peabody Journal of Education devoted Volume 75, Issue 1/2 to homeschooling, running several important articles that continue to be cited frequently in literature reviews. Highlights of this volume included articles on feminist themes in home schooling, special education and home schooling, partnerships with public schools, Richard Medlin’s survey of the literature on socialization, and a much-discussed critique of homeschooling by Chris Lubienski.
In 2003 the journal Evaluation and Research in Education devoted Volume 17, Issue 2/3 to homeschooling. Most of the articles published in this volume focused on homeschooling in countries other than the United States, though there was an important article by Mitchell Stevens on the U.S.A. as well as another critique of the movement by Chris Lubienski.
In 2004 the Journal of College Admissions devoted No. 185 to a much-needed discussion of homeschoolers and higher education. Important work was published on attitudes of university personnel toward homeschoolers, federal law governing homeschooling and higher education admission, performance of homeschooled kids in college, and practical advice for admissions officers seeking to recruit homeschooled applicants.
While much good work has been published on homeschooling since 2004 of course, it’s been five years since a significant academic journal devoted an entire issue to homeschooling. This year has seen two such efforts. A few weeks ago I reported on several articles published by TechTrends in vol. 53, No. 4. That issue was devoted to the cybercharter phenomenon. Some of the articles were better than others, but it was nice to see the trend recognized by a journal devoted to such things.
Now comes probably the most important special issue of a journal since the 2000 Peabody Journal release. Theory and Research in Education is a high-profile, high quality international education journal with great cachet in the field. As such I will be spending the next several posts reviewing the articles that collectively make up volume 7, number 3 of Theory and Research in Education, which is devoted entirely to homeschooling. As a foretaste of what’s to come, I’ll close this post with the contents of the issue. If you want to read the abstracts of these articles now you can view them here:
- Randall Curren
- Editorial
Theory and Research in Education 2009 7: 275-276.
- Cynthia M. Villalba
- Home-based education in Sweden: Local variations in forms of regulation
Theory and Research in Education 2009 7: 277-296.
- Thomas Spiegler
- Why state sanctions fail to deter home education: An analysis of home education in Germany and its implications for home education policies
Theory and Research in Education 2009 7: 297-309.
- Robert Kunzman
- Understanding homeschooling: A better approach to regulation
Theory and Research in Education 2009 7: 311-330.
- Milton Gaither
- Homeschooling in the USA: Past, present and future
Theory and Research in Education 2009 7: 331-346.
- Carrie Winstanley
- Too cool for school?: Gifted children and homeschooling
Theory and Research in Education 2009 7: 347-362.
- Michael S. Merry and Charles Howell
- Can intimacy justify home education?
Theory and Research in Education 2009 7: 363-381.
is the first scholarly book-length treatment of its theme. It is available for purchase
from 
Please be sure you disclose the makeup of the editorial board of this publication in your discussion. Unless things have changed or I am mixing this up with something else (possible), there are at least several prominent anti-homeschooling writers/thinkers whom homeschoolers have found to totally not “get” homeschooling…
Even the abstract of Kunzman’s article gives me cold chills:
“A more modest approach to regulation that focuses on basic skills testing would ultimately be more effective at helping the students who need it most.”
Anyone who had genuine understanding of homeschooling life can see the impossibility of this. If you require me to do basic skills testing, you require me to teach a curriculum. If you require me to teach your curriculum, you have removed my reason to homeschool and it advantage to my children.
Example: Many homeschoolers intentionally allow their children to begin reading at 8 or 9 to allow them to develop further before placing this demand on them. At 10 they may seem terribly behind. What happens to the child whose basic skills testing at 10 indicates he is not where the state deems he should be? And then – as homeschoolers everywhere will tell you – by 12, this child is reading on a high school level, just fine. Or not – because just as in public school – there are huge ranges of “normal.” But we see it over and over in the homeschooling community. Schooled norms are not relevant and surely aren’t what we’re going for. To propose to regulate homeschoolers “modestly” is something we should consult Jonathan Swift about.
An interesting exploration would be to consider the implicit bias in academic research of homeschooling because it is – wow – conducted by academics. There’s a problem of “meta” scale here.
Mr. Gaither, you have referenced Mr. Kunzman several times in your blog in a positive manner. He’s listed on your blog sidebar. You’re listed on his Indiana University website, along with Rob Reich (a decided foe of homeschooling autonomy).
I have to ask; do you support his universal basic testing proposal for all homeschoolers? Are you supportive of homeschooling autonomy?
Thank you for your consideration.
Hi Susan. Your question threw me for a second because Reich’s most frequent argument against homeschooling is that it deprives children of their autonomy.
But I think by autonomy here you mean the freedom of homeschoolers to do what they want without accountability to the government.
I have two answers to your question, one as a scholar and the other as a private citizen. As a scholar I don’t really have a view about homeschool regulations. My goal in my research is to study homeschooling as a phenomenon. I don’t intend my work to be an apologetic for or a critique of homeschooling as such. I just want my work explaining homeschooling to get it right. In my historical writing I try to tell a story that conservatives, liberals, and moderates will all be able to read and not think that I have tainted my analysis or narrative with political bias or hidden policy agendas.
As a private citizen I do have concerns that some parents will take advantage of the freedom homeschooling allows to cover for abuse or neglect. Exactly how best to try to protect the safety of children without infringing on the rights of parents is a complicated question to which I don’t have a tidy answer. My aunt is a social worker in rural Tennessee. She has dealt for years with case after case that would just break your heart if you heard her tell the stories. It is the sad and dismal truth that many parents do horrible things to their kids. Our land has tried many different things over the past 300 years to deal with such situations, and nothing has really emerged as the most obviously best approach. The tragedy of the human condition sometimes requires law to step in where private affections turn toxic. That’s about as far as I want to go here. I’m glad I’m a historian and not a legislator!
Mr. Gaither,
The basic tenents of our Constitution do not provide for citizens to be “accountable to the government”. Rather, it is the other way around.
I am happy to sign paperwork each year holding our illustrious education system harmless for its lack of involvement in the education of my children.
The discussion above echoes the conflict currently happening in England between home educators and the Labour government after Graham Badman was assigned the job of Reviewing home education guidelines and making recommendations. His review contained many recommendations that angered home educators, including compulsory licensing at the discretion of local education authorities, the right of local authorities to interview a child without his or her parents present and a requirement to submit a learning plan for the next year with the permission to home educate being withdrawn if the aims set out in the plan were not met:
http://www.freedomforchildrentogrow.org/8318-DCSF-HomeEdReviewBMK.PDF
A parliament select committee was called to review his review after an outcry from home educators and much reporting in the English and British media (it is only England and Wales that are affected by this review, as Scotland is independent in this regard. Some of the responses to this committee echo the concerns that home educators have with the Badman review:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmchilsch/memo/elehomed/contents.htm
You can be very glad that you’re not in Graham Badman’s position, Milton. If you were, you might even get a blog dedicated to you:
http://grahambadman.blogspot.com/
By the way, I’ll be very interested to read your take on Thomas Spiegler’s chapter. I have his book in German and have first-hand experience in home educating illegally in Germany. I’m busy writing my dissertation for my Masters degree (in German) on how compulsory schooling and its alternatives are constructed in German legal judgements and the media. I hit on this approach after reading Emma Stroobant’s thesis on homeschooling school-resistant children here on your blog, so thank you!
In response to your comment above, Susan might or might not be referring to autonomy for homeschooled children. My psychic powers are failing me this morning ;-).
However, Rob Reich’s assertion that homeschooling per se deprives children of autonomy is not necessarily correct. In the UK, the term autonomous home education refers to what is known in the USA as unschooling. I do know that he has been taken to task on occasion by home educators who represent the more autonomous (for the child) end of the spectrum. To me, Rob Reich’s assertion about the lack of autonomy for children conflicts with his call for regulation and testing. Under such a regime, families who follow an autonomous model would be more likely to fall foul of the system than families who follow a more curriculum-orientated method, as most religiously motivated home educators do.
I agree with you Scatty. In the archives I’ve got a review of Perry Glanzer’s argument against Reich. It has parallels to your own.
Melanie, you’ll get no argument from me. When I said “accountability to the government” what I mean is accountability to the larger society. By the consent of the governed we (in the form of our elected representatives) have established child protection and other laws. One reason homeschooling is such an interesting social phenomenon is that it exists along some of the abiding faultlines of our social system. We Americans value individual freedom, self-determination, privacy, and diversity. We also value strong community ties, strong families, public standards of decency, and civic responsibility. These tendencies frequently come into conflict with one another, and homeschooling exemplifies this very well. For good reason our government is frequently called “the American experiment.”
My use of the word autonomy was the literal “self law” or self-governing, which most parents are capable of successfully fulfilling for their children. I thought Scatty’s UK version was interesting, and I learned something new today.
I would assert that researchers always have a bias, so I appreciate your struggle for neutrality. I haven’t read your book (yet), but have found your posts interesting; particularly the recent Theobald post, as we have a one room school house site down the road from our family farm, along with lots of family memories.
Kunzman’s book was biased from the beginning, as: 1) he wanted universal basic skills testing for homeschoolers and 2) homeschoolers could be successfully counted with his universal plan. That lack of a complete homeschool census seems to bother him, but it’s no problem for homeschoolers. What he wants would destroy our homeschooling/autonomy integrity.
You have referenced Kunzman, Reich and others who aren’t seen as “homeschooling experts” inside the homeschool community, but are touted as such outside the homeschool community. It’s odd (being kind here) to have all these education professionals talking about us like they know who we are and what we need.
Following that, I understand your concern about children’s welfare. My husband served on the school board while our children were in the public high school and our younger ones were homeschooling. We had a different perspective than most, and observed too many awful school situations that tormented some kids/families.
The rod that Kunzman reported in the TN family’s story disturbed me. (Oddly, a social worker did check on them) I don’t recall instances of educational neglect in the 6 families he interviewed. I did think a couple of the families were unschooling, but didn’t know it, and felt guilty for not staying on their chosen, more structured track. Mr. Kunzman keeps referencing one family as slackers….ie the teen counting on his fingers. But the family was addressing it, and homeschoolers know children mature at different paces. I agree with him that “some public school officials and social workers do have a decidedly jaded view of homeschooling.” (Not assuming the same of your aunt. :-) ) Abuse is unwanted in the homeschool community; including governmental bullying of law abiding families because they choose to homeschool.
Or don’t choose to homeschool, but are forced. As a homeschool advocate, I’ve worked with pushouts and dropouts; particularly since NCLB passage. One nearby school brought a prepared document to a 15 year old boy’s home for the mother to sign stating he would be homeschooled that year. (She had no prior intention of doing such, but did so after 2 school officials forced the issue) Another principal listed a dropout as homeschooled in the quarterly report to the regional school office to keep a low dropout rate) This public school phenomenon isn’t unusual. I’d be happy if public school experts focused on those problems in their realm, and left homeschoolers alone. Bottom line, I’ve often said that my kid is not a data point.
I was just curious about your perspective on the literary/researcher company you keep (particularly in this current THEORY AND RESEARCH IN EDUCATION issue). Apologies for the length.
Lots of wisdom there Susan. Great point about the cynical use of the homeschool option by public school personnel eager to be rid of undesirables who will bring down their test scores.
I understand your (and many homeschoolers’) frustration with outside researchers trying to colonize your life for our own professional careers. All I can say is that homeschoolers are definitely not unique here. Academics study pretty much everything–it’s just what we do. Maybe what we do isn’t valuable to you, which is fine. But I still like to study things. It’s just fun to learn stuff I didn’t know before and to try to make sense of things that perplex or fascinate me. Homeschooling is one of those things. I’ve gotten pretty positive feedback from homeschoolers who have read my book so far, but it makes perfect sense to me why some homeschoolers wouldn’t want to read a book by an outsider. That’s fine.
I’d like to read the book, and appreciate your openness about the knottiness of the situation.
I could talk about homeschooling all day, every day…it’s a passion that I want to protect. I think I understand your passion about homeschooling history, as it is fascinating.
The concern is the interest in us by people who generally work to keep all children in the public school fold. That’s my concern. The media picks out “homeschool experts”, because they’re professionally available to them.
Having someone like Professor Kunzman -with his agenda-speaking about us, rather than the local homeschool leader is disturbing. We’re busy homeschooling and living our family life with our children, while more and more articles come out about homeschooling. I’d be ok with little attention towards a wholesome lifestyle few people understand. But I know I’m dreamin’. :-)
Thanks for the forum!
Milton said: We Americans value individual freedom, self-determination, privacy, and diversity. We also value strong community ties, strong families, public standards of decency, and civic responsibility. These tendencies frequently come into conflict with one another, and homeschooling exemplifies this very well.
I’m saying: I fail to see how homeschooling exemplifies conflict between valuing individual freedom, self determination, privacy and diversity and valuing strong community ties, strong families, public standards of decency and civic responsibility.
To the contrary, I find homeschoolers to be one of the few populations where these two things are NOT in conflict. Homeschoolers are busy demonstrating how individual freedom contributes to creating strong community ties. They demonstrate how self-determination CREATES civic responsibility. And so on.
I think this is one of those problems of inherent bias. If we presume support of government schools as what demonstrates civic responsibilty or community orientation, we are blinded. Homeschoolers are regular and hard workers in the political system, in their churches, in community service organizations, and quite simply, with their neighbors. I and many other homeschoolers have the experience of being told “Oh – you’re in EVERYTHING” or “You’re EVERYwhere” in our community.
Homeschoolers’ strong commitment to individual freedom, self-determination, and privacy are among the things that allow us to be community-oriented. No conflict. Except the presumed one — that participation in government schools = a community orientation. We eschew that, and we are seen as in conflict with community and public standards?
No. Maybe we want something better for our communities. And we are working in our own families and our communities to create it.
But you gotta get outta the conditioned bias toward schooling-as-we-know-it to see it.
Win, be careful not to overgeneralize to all homeschoolers based on your own experience and those of your acquaintances. Not all homeschoolers are civic mavens.
Let me give you a quick example of potential conflict. Mainstream social norms presume the equality of the sexes. Some homeschoolers believe that women are subordinate to men–a few think women should not vote, drive, and so on. Should Americans celebrate this diversity of opinions about women’s status? Should we worry that girls are being discriminated against and try to pass laws on their behalf?
What I’ve been trying to say is that I’m not arguing for one particular answer to such questions in my scholarship. I’m just chronicling the issues and looking to get historic leverage on them.
But Milton, you are presupposing that your sample of homeschoolers who presume women are subordinate to men does not have a cohort among nonhomeschoolers. Most of the people I know who believe women are subordinate to men are people whose children go to school. Homeschooling doesn’t have anything to do with it. the same goes for, say, non-acceptance of the theory of evolution. Most of the people who do not accept the theory of evolution are people who attended PUBLIC schools. Yet somehow such belief is strongly correlated to homeschoolers only.
Yup, I agree 100% with Win. I see this argument against legalising homeschooling all the time on German forums: “Look at the USA! They allow homeschooling and they’re awash with creationism! We don’t want to go down that evil road.” Never mind that the huge majority of those in the USA who reject evolution are products of full-time, secular state schooling.
The difference (at least to theorists who worry about such things) is that anti-evolutionists or female subordinationists who send their children to public schools have their kids exposed to alternative views at least. Those who keep their kids at home are able to sequester them from other influences entirely. I agree with both of you that Public Schools are typically not nearly so good at exposing children to diversity as their advocates suggest. I’ve said that many times on this blog.
I believe that the converse is also true but unrecognized: that homeschools are typically not nearly so bad at exposing children to diversity as their detractors suggest.
I’ve lived a bunch of places, and in most cases, my homeschool group was more diverse — both in ethnicities and in culture/philosophies — than the “white flight” suburban schools my children would have attended in our communities.
Unfortunately, some of the most parochial attitudes I encountered were when we hosted an exchange student and I had to deal with “school,” because by law such students must attend school. Wow. Now that was an eye opener, as to people’s beliefs and attitudes regarding “diversity.”
Which theories of education are most closely associated with homeschooling?
There is a plethora of research on the educational philosophies that are closely associated with homeschooling. Which philosophies and theories do you feel are most closely aligned with homeschooling?