I’ve come to realize that the word “homeschool” can have a radically different meaning to different people and it can evoke just about any emotion imaginable. You would think I should have learned this long ago, but I didn’t want to admit a word that meant so much to me was basically powerless because of its diversity of definitions. Reading Mom’s recommendation Kingdom of Children: Culture and Controversy in the Homeschooling Movement gave me a broader overview of what the word can mean from the outside and to different insiders.
Sociologist Mitchel Stevens does a remarkable job of taking a fair look at homeschooling from the outside. It was as much an education in what a reasonable outsider might see in Christianity as well as in homeschooling. It’s clear he doesn’t “get” either, but what he writes seems fair and reasonable for the amount of understanding anyone from the outside can be expected to have. This is to be expected, for any account from the outside of any movement can never be as informed as one from the inside, but it does show different and interesting truths.
As far as I understand it, homeschooling had its pioneers in the 70’s and 80’s and mostly consisted of liberal minded women who continued to challenge assumptions about birth, babies, and childrearing. I always envisioned that we were in this ‘pioneer’ category, though we were on the back end of it (1990), getting ideas from the work of others. We never joined a homeschool support group and forged very much a path of our own. We certainly were never involved in the “Christian” homeschool movement, except that a few families at our church were. In those early years it was enough to know someone was like you so it didn’t matter how it was implemented, a homeschooler was a homeschooler and you could pick each other out in a crowd. That and the fact that my lovely mother didn’t want to poison our minds with the dark side of the homeschooling movement left me blissfully ignorant of the great divide among homeschoolers.
Stevens call the two groups “believers” (mostly evangelical Christians homeschooling mainly for religious reasons) and “inclusives” (those who welcomed anybody and any way of homeschooling for any number of reasons). He describes the “inclusives” as a network of loosely connected islands, and I suppose that would make us one of those islands with less connection to the rest. I think it just worked out that way. There weren’t other people around who had the same focus and concerns that Mom did, so we struck out mostly on our own. We homeschooled for the educational and familial benefits. Religion was only brought up as an aside, if at all. Now I know a bit better why. Stevens is fair to both sides, but he can’t hide that some “believers” (most notably its leaders) are less than gracious in the way they express their view that they know God’s will for raising children. I’ll be more careful next time about bringing up my ‘new’ thoughts about how homeschooling can help parents fulfill God’s will for a family in a beautiful and exciting way. That would put me in with a group that means something vastly different by the word ‘homeschool’ than I do. I still relate to these kids (homeschoolers can pick each other out in a crowd) but I have little in common in terms of educational philosophy, and that is what I mean when I say ‘homeschool.”
So what can I say? Do I throw out the word because it means something different to most of the world? If so, then should I do the same thing with the word “Christian?” If not, am I willing to be fitted with an image that most likely doesn’t describe me at all? Maybe it’s best to keep it on the down low most of the time. That fits with Einstein’s sober warning “Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from that of their social environment.” I’m not among the happy few . . . yet.
Of course, homeschooling has been around forever, but it is fair to say that the modern homeschooling movement had its pioneers in the 70's and 80's. Though we didn't actually withdraw from school until 1990, home education -- in theory and practice -- had been a big part of our lives for several years before that. To my mind, our official beginning was a change of degree, not direction.
I wouldn't throw the word out; there's really nothing to replace it with. Stick with the original meaning, provide explanation and illustration as needed, and don't let one approach hijack the word!
Of course, I'm an old curmudgeon, and a dinosaur when it comes to language. I'm still trying to use "he" as a gender-neutral pronoun and "gay" to mean happy....
While people as a whole are often both ignorant and opinionated on labels like 'homeschool' and 'Christian', an incorrect assumption doesn't negate the fact that those are integral parts of you. The words may not define you entirely, but that assumption on someone else's part doesn't make them right and it doesn't change the truth of who you are.
In today's world, postmodern thought firmly believes that language defines reality. So, if society can tell you what homeschooling is, it doesn't matter if their definition is correct or not. It becomes fact simply by being stated. Logic doesn't come into it, and this line of thought makes slander just as evidential as an affidavit.
As for homeschooling, whether you're talking to the totally uninformed, the marginally involved, or the homeschool junkies, society can't help but take a wary approach to it. Most people don't seem to know this, but school - for young people and as an institution - was created to indoctrinate people. Not to educate. While this isn't generally acknowledged on a conscious level, people can't help but react when they discover that someone was independently indoctrinated.
All that to say, don't worry about how other people define a word. The truth of how you live your life is more important than a philosophical argument. You ARE a Christian and you WERE homeschooled. Just because someone thinks that these labels can predict your beliefs, actions, or thoughts doesn't make that someone right. Does it?
What a beautiful encouragement. Thank you, Brenda.
"Most people don't seem to know this, but school - for young people and as an institution - was created to indoctrinate people. Not to educate."
Brenda! Have you been reading John Taylor Gatto, or did you come to that conclusion through some other route? His Underground History of American Education is the best I've found for articulating this idea, though his style takes some getting used to.
Janet knew immediately that I'd jump at that part of your post. :)
Actually, in my wild youth I was certified as a teacher. High school English. Sad, very sad. Between that and my own homeschooling education (and The Light and The Glory, by Peter Marshall and David Manuel), I found out that the settlers of Massachusettes Colony actually stated that goal as part of their reasoning for elementary education. The Puritans wanted to make sure their children believed the same things they did, and the recognized that children form their own unconscious doctrine around that age. My professors explained repeatedly what a terrible imposition on freedom of thought this was, but I always wondered why they didn't notice how much public school (and subsequently society) changed after prayer was taken out of the curriculum. Perhaps believing in evolution - instead of God - was not a step towards progress, after all?
No, I haven't been reading him, but now that I've found him I'll start. :)
Enjoy! Underground is a long but fascinating book. I had read it quite a while ago and enjoyed it, but found some of his ideas a little off-the-wall. When I read it a second time I really sat up and took notice. Why? More experience, for one thing, but mostly because in the interim I had read Francis Schaeffer's The God Who Is There and Escape from Reason. I figure that when a Reformed Protestant philosopher living in Switzerland, and a self-described lapsed Catholic New York City schoolteacher -- who probably never heard of each other -- give you the same weird picture of the philosophies behind modern American education, it's time to pay attention.
Anyone who wants a shorter introduction to Gatto might enjoy Dumbing Us Down and A Different Kind of Teacher.
Janet,
Now that I am actually checking your blog DAILY, you aren't writing as much! haha
Married life moves slower than pre-wedding life, which I LOVE. (IOW, I have time to read blogs.) :)
Just wanted to say hi!
SarBear (a web name of mine)
Sarah - I remember those days. All our friends stopped inviting us to things since we "must be busy now that you're married." Here's a little advice. Enjoy it - yes! - but don't let the extra time lull you into doing things that aren't important. Don't waste any of that precious time. Make everything intentional. This can and should include relaxation. But if you start out intentionally, it will help you avoid getting overwhelmed when the busier times of life start arriving.
L,
I appreciate your comments but would like you to elaborate... especially on "things that aren't important" and how being "intentional" could prevent one from getting more stressed out. I tend to stress about how I spend every moment of a day, so learning to actually have "down time" with my new husband has brought a pure happiness reminiscent of childhood. "To enjoy God" is an act of worship. "To enjoy [being with] each other" seems an act of gratitude (to God for the blessing of marriage). Perhaps that is what you meant -- not to be idle but to at least enjoy being with each other?? We are aware that these early days are so precious. Share more if you have time!
S
OOPS!!! Not to "L" but to "H", right?! Sorry - I didn't pay close enough attention to the signature. I still want to hear more, from any married woman.
But one last thing -- if we (particularly Christians have this pressure I think) set out to be intentional and then things don't work out how we "intended," isn't that setting up an expectation? -- which could lead to disappointment and then even bitterness? Depends on what the intention is, I suppose. I shouldn't be writing at the end of a long day! Too much rambling, sorry!
Yes, this is Heather. (I don't mind if you use my whole name, but thanks for being mindful.)
Those are some good questions. I'll explain some specifics from my life, and I hope that will elucidate.
In the early months of our marriage, we had few outside obligations. But when things started coming up (Bible study/small group, dinner meeting with a family, etc.) we did not carefully consider if we should add them to our schedule. So at some point, we were over-committed and had to do the hard work of cutting things out. If we had said "no" in the first place (that's what I mean by being intentional) we wouldn't have had to do that hard cutting out part.
Another example is how I spent my time alone at home. I chose to stay home as a homemaker from the beginning. 100% of my day time was under my own management. I am a homebody by nature; if my extrovert husband and sons didn't take me out of the house, I could stay home for weeks and not get bored!
But I wish I had set up a routine for myself, spending my time intentionally. What often happened was that I would get caught up in a book and then suddenly realize that it was 4pm and I needed to make dinner and clean the house before Jon got home from work. If I had planned the cleaning and dinner prep for earlier, I could have done the same amount of reading intentionally and guilt-free.
In addition, I would have had a base around which to work once the kids did come along and change my world (:
Does that make sense?
Regarding things not turning out how you "intended." Included in "being intentional" is praying for wisdom and following the Spirit's leading. It means you've thought about why you do everything you do, and so when circumstances change or things don't "work out," you can make changes based on something real instead of flying by the seat of your pants.
Feel free to ask for more clarification, and to make suggestions.
THANK YOU so much. I was really interested in what you meant, and now I understand. I have been thinking about it a lot (in a positive way) -- it's good advice and means a lot coming from someone freshly married (compared to 40-some years, I mean). :) My own parents don't remember their early stages so well.
It's funny -- most people are supportive or at least understanding of me not wanting to overcommit myself as a newlywed, but I have already gotten one scowl from a parent to whom I was trying to explain why I'm no longer able to teach at any hour of the day (I am trying to confine my work schedule to one condensed block each day). Apparently, being married just wasn't a good enough reason to her why I shouldn't bend over backward to accommodate HER schedule. The fight for "family first" has already begun -- and I don't even have my own children yet! It probably only gets MORE difficult standing up for one's family in this workaholic world...but God gives grace.
Anyway, thank you again SO much for your valuable insights into these early months! I appreciate them!
Good for you for starting now to subordinate work to family needs -- by the time you have children, you will have had plenty of practice. :)
We mothers of children taken music lessons may scowl when the timing doesn't work out to our satisfaction -- believe me, I've done my share of trying to find lesson times that work with my family's schedule, and it's not fun -- but unless it's easy to find another teacher, we'll take whatever we can get.
Hrm.. I guess it proves Heather's statement about me being an extrovert, as I don't remember a time of feeling like we were overcommitted, at least on a regular basis - certainly there were/are weeks where lots of things get scheduled, but then the next week is slower to make up for it.
I assume you aren't talking about Lime Daley stuff, which definitely has taken up lots of time. Only two more months to go...
I was talking about stuff in the first year or two. We dropped the one Bible study as one of the parings down. Part of the busy-ness of that time was the weekly childbirth class, I believe.
weekly childbirths? ick.
Yeah, but on the good side, the gestation isn't all that long.
I forgot about the class - yeah, that did make things busy. As I remember, I think the reason for stopping going to the bible study wasn't just for time reasons. I have now forgotten what the one thing that Lisa and I agreed about; we were so shocked that there existed such a thing.
