The goal of homeschooling (CC)

[LisaKinVA]

The following quote is making the homeschool rounds today, and I will confess, I had an immediate, negative reaction.  However, upon further reflection, if the author is who I believe it to be, she is not against a rigorous homeschool education, although grammatically speaking, it does sound that way to me.

 

The quote is:

 

"The goal of homeschooling is not a rigorous education so they can pursue an illustrious career.  The goal is strong character, wisdom, and discernment to pursue the life God has called them to live."

 

Am I wrong in my reading of this quote, that the GOAL of homeschooling is...strong character, wisdom, and discernment?  

 

And that if she really meant to say a rigorous education was a "good" thing, she should have said, "The goal of a rigorous homeschool education is NOT....the goal is..."

 

Because, my personal beef with this is that I believe the natural BYPRODUCTS of a rigorous, Christian, homeschool education are a strong character, wisdom and discernment.  (I say byproducts, because IMO, a child learns strong character by having to work through and struggle with difficult physical and mental tasks, wisdom and discernment by learning the Word of God, and then applying it to life, and to their studies of literature, philosophy, history, current events, science, etc. ) They are not mutually exclusive, but actually take place concurrently.

 

I have just heard sentiments like this mostly used by people who wish to justify NOT having (or even attempting) a rigorous education (and my definition of rigor is somewhat fluid, as it is tailored to the child and family -- but certainly means providing the best education one can to any child based upon their ability, family finances, time...etc.). 

 

I am not in anyway suggesting it is better to have a "smart" child than a "kind" child, etc.  But, as someone who strives to have a rigorous, Christian homeschool, I am put off by this, because it makes it sound that you cannot really be working towards both of those goals at the same time.  

 

Thoughts?

 

ETA:  This is by Jeannie Fulbright, author of the Apologia elementary books.  And, from poking around her FB page, I wasn't wrong in my interpretation.  I understand what she's saying -- but I cannot help but disagree.  She believes if you focus on spritual issues, that the education aspects (if that is God's plan) will essentially work themselves out.  Hmm...great...wonderful.  Kinda smacks of, if you just have enough faith, God will prevent your husband from dying, living you alone and unable to support your family, so no you silly woman, you don't need any education!

 

[Melissa in Australia]

I have heard this exact quote before. , several years ago. It was told to me by several different families and they were all ultra-religious families, ones that follow Gothard (spelling?) and the Pearls. I don't know if the quote is from those people  or not.

 

 

[Rosie_0801]

People seem to love a false dichotomy, don't they?

 

My non-scientific theory is that we spend too much time in kindergarten teaching opposites. :p

 

 

Note to self: Teach dd opposites some time. Seriously, this is one of those things I haven't managed to explain properly to this kid with a language disorder. I will report back in ten years if I notice that she is less prone to creating/ appreciating false dichotomies than what I think the average is.  :laugh:

[abba12]

I'm going to disagree with you here. I don't believe character and wisdom are the byproducts, I believe they are the goal for my family. I say that as someone who is early-start and strongly for a rigorous education, but that education is the byproduct for me. 

 

Ultimately I think both goals go together, and one leads to the other. I don't believe the Gothard types who neglect education will produce wise or strong charactered children.  But if I have to chose between them, the character and wisdom is my first focus. The education is a wonderful, and important, bonus. 

 

From that perspective, I don't have a problem with the wording. It isn't excluding the importance of rigor, but in a community where education is increasingly becoming the core goal, it's reminding the families it applies to that the focus on academics, while vital, is secondary. It's helping the families it applies to remember where their focus is, and on those occasions where there is a choice between rigor and character, it's giving them permission to go against the grain and choose character, and not feel completely like the odd ones out. 

 

But, it doesn't apply to all families, and if those aren't your goals, and you don't identify with that, I don't think you should take it as a criticism either. 

[LisaKinVA]

I'm going to disagree with you here. I don't believe character and wisdom are the byproducts, I believe they are the goal for my family. I say that as someone who is early-start and strongly for a rigorous education, but that education is the byproduct for me. 

 

Ultimately I think both goals go together, and one leads to the other. I don't believe the Gothard types who neglect education will produce wise or strong charactered children.  But if I have to chose between them, the character and wisdom is my first focus. The education is a wonderful, and important, bonus. 

 

From that perspective, I don't have a problem with the wording. It isn't excluding the importance of rigor, but in a community where education is increasingly becoming the core goal, it's reminding the families it applies to that the focus on academics, while vital, is secondary. It's helping the families it applies to remember where their focus is, and on those occasions where there is a choice between rigor and character, it's giving them permission to go against the grain and choose character, and not feel completely like the odd ones out. 

 

But, it doesn't apply to all families, and if those aren't your goals, and you don't identify with that, I don't think you should take it as a criticism either. 

 

It's not that these aren't included in my goals -- but I've LIVED and watched kids grow up under those goals, and lived the educational neglect (a church school), and the trite replies of, "if it's in God's plan for you to do X, you'll do it."  And this is a paraphrase of Jeanne from her FB page.  Meanwhile, the lack of educational opportunities that were foisted upon children, etc. eliminated opportunities, or delayed them to a point it became more costly.

 

This philosophy enables "lazy" homeschoolers, who feel that it's enough that their children learn to read and write, and do basic math. I'm not talking about a parent homeschooling who isn't using the same materials as I do -- because that is what is best for their family -- but are actually choosing to do just the bare minimum because it's "fine," because it's the easy thing, or because they just don't care (I've heard this attitude from public school parents who don't look into what goes on in their local schools, or other forms of education as this, "It was good enough for me...")

 

 

In my opinion, character, wisdom and discernment are actually by-products of a rigorous, Christian education. Our children learn character by working through difficult tasks (physical and mental), they learn wisdom and discernment by studying the Word of God and applying it to their lives -- actively comparing God's word to the study of literature, history, current events, philosophy, etc.

 

We don't avoid the things that challenge our faith -- Truth Does Not Fear!

 

But too often, people are so afraid of children falling away from the faith, that when the time is right (which will depend upon a child's age/maturity), we continue to shield and protect -- thinking we're preventing harm. When, by refusing to help our children reason through difficult issues within the church, community, nation and world -- we actually handicap them. We aren't helping them to build the critical skills they will need as adults.

 

Remember, God never tells His people to sit back and simply listen passively to what we are told!

 

He tells us in Acts 17:11, that when Paul preached in Berea, the Bereans searched the scriptures to see if what Paul was saying was true. They didn't just take Paul's word for it. And yet, how many of us will simply sit and nod when the preacher talks, walk out of the sanctuary, and not even question what was just said?

 

Are we practicing 1 Thessalonians 5:21? Are we setting out to prove (test, examine, scrutinize) all things, and hold fast to that which is good? Or, are we satisfied hearing only that which appeals to our own sense of right and wrong, putting our own sinful flesh above God's word, simply because it's easy?

 

This is what I mean by a rigorous, Christian home education.  The two are inextricably linked. 

[Hyacinth]

"The goal of homeschooling is not a rigorous education so they can pursue an illustrious career. The goal is strong character, wisdom, and discernment to pursue the life God has called them to live."

 

It's a clunky statement. I think it's worth focusing on the "pursue an illustrious career" part. Christians are reminded not to put riches above the kingdom of God (the love of money and all that). So maybe she's saying something like "The goal of homeschooling isn't to produce a child who chases wealth but, rather, one who chases the things of God."

 

I don't know. Like I said, it's clunky. And, really, for a Christian, isn't that the goal regardless of how a family educates?

[abba12]

It's not that these aren't included in my goals -- but I've LIVED and watched kids grow up under those goals, and lived the educational neglect (a church school), and the trite replies of, "if it's in God's plan for you to do X, you'll do it."  And this is a paraphrase of Jeanne from her FB page.  Meanwhile, the lack of educational opportunities that were foisted upon children, etc. eliminated opportunities, or delayed them to a point it became more costly.

 

You asked for thoughts, apparently you were hoping only for thoughts which agreed with you.

 

It's possible to have academics as a secondary goal without neglect or delayed opportunities or anything else. I too lived it, My husband and I grew up in it, our friends who homeschooled grew up in it. It was sadly common for homeschooling in the 90s and it's WHY I am so adamantly for academics and rigor and pushing my children to the furthest they are capable of.

 

And yet, I still agree with her comment, and view the lifestyle of homeschooling as paramount, which is why, even if a wonderful school opened up next door, I would almost definitely continue (rigorously) homeschooling. 

 

Different strokes I suppose. 

[LisaKinVA]

I have heard this exact quote before. , several years ago. It was told to me by several different families and they were all ultra-religious families, ones that follow Gothard (spelling?) and the Pearls. I don't know if the quote is from those people  or not.

 

This is where I heard the sentiment first as well, but AFAIK, the author isn't from that segment.

[mom2att]

The following quote is making the homeschool rounds today, and I will confess, I had an immediate, negative reaction.  However, upon further reflection, if the author is who I believe it to be, she is not against a rigorous homeschool education, although grammatically speaking, it does sound that way to me.

 

The quote is:

 

"The goal of homeschooling is not a rigorous education so they can pursue an illustrious career.  The goal is strong character, wisdom, and discernment to pursue the life God has called them to live."

 

Am I wrong in my reading of this quote, that the GOAL of homeschooling is...strong character, wisdom, and discernment?  

 

 

I would have to say that I agree with the quote.

 

But when I started homeschooling, 14 years ago with my oldest starting K, the "rigorous education" part WAS my main focus. I wanted so much more for her than just sitting in a classroom for 4 hours (half day K back then) and learning the alphabet, which she had known forever. It was really THE reason I started homeschooling.

 

It didn't stay that way, though. The time and relationship and opportunity, the things that make homeschooling more of a lifestyle than just an alternate education method, these are what I have loved about homeschooling, and why I have continued to homeschool.

 

I'm not the most rigorous homeschooler on the block, but I'm no slouch, either. For me, the rigor is a byproduct, not a goal. My number one reason for homeschooling is time with my kids and increased opportunity to help them become who God intends them to be. In gaining this, I am naturally better equipped to give them a quality education, with rigor applied to help each child achieve this goal as an individual learner, not as a number of AP classes or test scores. 

 

I can't apply the same level of rigor for my middle child that I did for my oldest--he's just not that kind of learner. He's still getting a rigorous education and will be well-prepared for whatever life God calls him to.  My goal in homeschooling is as the author stated above. That neither lessens the value of learning nor lowers the bar of excellence, necessarily. For some it might, and that's unfortunate. But my goal in homeschooling, like my goal in parenting, is to raise kids who love God and want to follow Him all of their lives. Maintaining a high educational standard tailored to each individual child does not go away because of that.

[Amira]

Statements like these bug me too because I think the point of homeschooling is to academically educate your child. Every parent is already supposed to try to teach their kids to be decent people no matter who teaches the science and history classes. Homeschooling doesn't mean that I should do a better job with teaching my kids to be good people, it means that in addition to doing that, I also have have to make sure that they learn trig. I'm taking on an additional responsibility, not changing or enhancing my original one.

Obviously there are lots of reasons why people homeschool and there can be many different non-academic benefits, but that doesn't mean that our main responsibility as homeschoolers isn't to academically educate our children.

[Guest]

Those types of statements -where it could totally be read several different ways because of clunkiness - drive me crazy.

 

In my house, whatever we do, we do to the glory of God. Meaning we strive to use our brains and mental powers to their fullest with a rigorous education and we strive to be transformed more and more into the image of Christ in our hearts and minds. It all falls under one roof.

[*Lulu*]

The problem with the quote is that raising a child who is discerning, kind, has integrity, or any other spiritual or character strength is not the goal of homeschooling; it is the goal of parenting.

 

As a Christian parent those are my goals. Full stop. If my children are in private school, public school, or homeschooled doesn't change those goals.

[DawnM]

Eh, whatever.  I just do my own thing anyway.  

 

I lived with worry, stress, not sure if I was doing it right, etc......but my kids are thriving despite me.  

[marbel]

Agreeing that it's clunky and ambiguous.

 

My take on what she's saying: education is not job training.    "...rigorous education so they can pursue an illustrious career..."

 

And honestly, haven't we all come across homeschoolers who act as though it is?  I sure have.  There are a lot of people who push their kids academically in order to get the prize: entry into an elite university so they can get a high-paying job.  

 

 

 

[FO4UR]

I just had an epiphany.  This is why I dislike the Apologia science series so much. I think there is great value in learning the reasoning behind both creation and evolution, so my reasoning is not that it is a creation science series.  My reason for disliking it is that it doesn't merely present the science within the context of scientific thinking.  It presents a strong, dogmatic lens through which to "discern" all other science information. Narrative form is fine, preferable even, but there is a way to give a narrative science in manner that encourages the reader to think scientifically, not merely set up false litmus tests.  

 

 

A well-paying, beloved career is one of my goals for my kids.  I admit it openly.  

 

It's hard to have character when you have to choose between feeding your children and putting shoes on their feet.

 

[HomeAgain]

I just had an epiphany.  This is why I dislike the Apologia science series so much. I think there is great value in learning the reasoning behind both creation and evolution, so my reasoning is not that it is a creation science series.  My reason for disliking it is that it doesn't merely present the science within the context of scientific thinking.  It presents a strong, dogmatic lens through which to "discern" all other science information. Narrative form is fine, preferable even, but there is a way to give a narrative science in manner that encourages the reader to think scientifically, not merely set up false litmus tests.  

 

 

A well-paying, beloved career is one of my goals for my kids.  I admit it openly.  

 

It's hard to have character when you have to choose between feeding your children and putting shoes on their feet.

 

It took 'til now?  LOL  The blog posts they wrote on the LDS were appalling.  The idea that they could present something so skewed and with so little regard to facts made me seriously doubt their books had any worth.  This quote here is just a few sprinkles on the icing.

 

[LisaKinVA]

I just had an epiphany.  This is why I dislike the Apologia science series so much. I think there is great value in learning the reasoning behind both creation and evolution, so my reasoning is not that it is a creation science series.  My reason for disliking it is that it doesn't merely present the science within the context of scientific thinking.  It presents a strong, dogmatic lens through which to "discern" all other science information. Narrative form is fine, preferable even, but there is a way to give a narrative science in manner that encourages the reader to think scientifically, not merely set up false litmus tests.  

 

 

A well-paying, beloved career is one of my goals for my kids.  I admit it openly.  

 

It's hard to have character when you have to choose between feeding your children and putting shoes on their feet.

 

When it comes to using Christian texts for science, I have and do...mostly at the elementary level.  By middle school we're doing origin studies, history of Science, as well as actual high school level texts (I usually use Christian high school texts, but we skip portions that are really origins studies (read it as part of origins vs. part of science), and by high school, we're using AP/College level texts.  I really want my children to explore the tough topics at home with me (at least the first time).  I want them to reason through these topics with me.  In many ways, I feel that this mirrors a more classical interpretation of science (even though we use a lot of textbooks).  My three older children, their father and I have had lots of very interesting discussions about science (and issues of the day).  Very rarely do we use the phrase "you're wrong...we ask why they think that, and then will usually point them towards resources they need to read, and compare (which includes other scriptures).  So many topics in both school and life are not simply black and white.  BUT, at the younger level we do really try to teach a solid foundation (reading through the whole Bible, studying more in depth the Patriarchs, the Prophets, the Books of Wisdom, the Gospels...memorizing passages, you get the idea).

 

I have my last two in Elementary now, so probably won't switch away from what we've done in the past -- but I do struggle with some texts for my middle schooler next year.  He'll be doing Biology at a high school level.  I had used Abeka, but I got rid of it, as I was planning to do either BJU or Apologia for 7th.  Now, I just don't know.

[happypamama]

Eh, I vote clunky but well-meaning.

 

I'd say that the goal of PARENTING, first, is to raise children who love and serve God in whatever they do.

 

I'd say that the goal of HOMESCHOOLING is to help my children to use their God-given abilities to learn and to prepare for whatever future adult life God will call them to do.

[Rosie_0801]

"The goal of homeschooling is not a rigorous education so they can pursue an illustrious career. The goal is strong character, wisdom, and discernment to pursue the life God has called them to live."

 

It's a clunky statement. I think it's worth focusing on the "pursue an illustrious career" part. Christians are reminded not to put riches above the kingdom of God (the love of money and all that). So maybe she's saying something like "The goal of homeschooling isn't to produce a child who chases wealth but, rather, one who chases the things of God."

 

Yet God rewarded people like Joseph and Job with riches, so he can't be altogether against wealth.

[marbel]

Yet God rewarded people like Joseph and Job with riches, so he can't be altogether against wealth.

 

Nothing wrong with wealth.   What's wrong is prioritizing wealth over other things (or people).   

 

And nothing wrong with working toward a career that will produce wealth.  (In case my post above is misinterpreted because of my clunky wording, and I don't necessarily mean by Rosie just because I'm quoting her.)   Pursuing wealth as the most important thing is the problem.

 

I'm thinking of my dentist, who is wealthy.  But he is wealthy because he's a good dentist.  He also gives a lot. Free dental care to people in need, stuff like that.  He didn't set out to be wealthy; he set out to be a good dentist.  

 

[FriedClams]

I have always seen schoolwork and academic rigor as tools to help hone my children's character. With hard work comes perseverance, diligence, resiliency.... So, we pursue academics with enthusiasm here. I don't take days off "to work on character issues", we address them ALL the time and often use schoolwork to help with that. (Wow, math can be a serious character training tool!)

 

I also view my job as a homeschool mom as to prepare my kids as well as is possible to be prepared for anything God has for them - be it homemaking or nuclear medicine. Not that God cannot overcome anything I fail at teaching - but I really see my job as equipping and preparing and I take it seriously.

 

All that being said, I would MUCH prefer my kids be working in a lesser "dead end" job with a true love for God, true contentment in their walk with Him, and a desire to serve others wholeheartedly than be the chief neurologist at Mass General and unsaved.

[Rosie_0801]

I'm thinking of my dentist, who is wealthy.  But he is wealthy because he's a good dentist.  He also gives a lot. Free dental care to people in need, stuff like that.  He didn't set out to be wealthy; he set out to be a good dentist.  

 

 

What would it matter if he had set out to be wealthy? Wealthy and good are not mutually exclusive (not saying you said that) and I don't think many people become wealthy by accident. 

 

Sometimes these conversations sound too much like poverty being made out as a virtue and it isn't.

 

If healthy, wealthy and wise is an option, we'll take all three thanks!

[coralloyd]

I was homeschooled for most of my education and have homeschooled my children for nine years. The problem that I see, with some parents, is that they get too caught up in proving that they are doing a good job homeschooling. They drive, and drive their kids to the point where all that mattered is getting that grade, or gaining that intelligence. It is easy for them to forget that they are parents first then academic teachers.

 

Our focus can become school and nothing else if we are not careful. Yes, we can teach character, wisdom, and discernment through our homeschool, but we can also make the actual school work the main focus instead. I have seen the opposite also. There are those parents that in the name of character forgo the academics. Neither one is good, but both extremes exist. Rigor is not synonymous with character, wisdom, and discernment.   

 

 

[Laurie4b]

Strong character, etc. is the work of the Holy Spirit (though I would call it being conformed to Christ's image) and is God's goal for us in life. We as parents are in a position in which can be used in that process or be hindrances to that process in the lives of our children and it is part of our duty as stewards of our children to think about those things..  It is not the goal of education, per se, though education can be a means by which the Holy Spirit works--whether in public school, private school, or homeschool. 

 

What concerns me about the quote is the way that it can be read to mean that other stuff --like rigorous academics---aren't important. And we know too many stories of children being offered an education at home that would have infuriated the parents had the public schools offered so little. 

 

However, there is also something to be said for Christian parents more interested in padding their children's resumes (like the rest of parents) and having those academics, extra-curriculars, etc. consume so much time, effort, and focus in and of themselves that the focus on God is relegated to second or third tier. There is certainly some time needed for God alone. Time focused on other things like academics can be done to the glory of God or it can be done for its own sake. There is a place to think carefully about that. And for some children, a rigorous education is excellent vocational training. It is hiding a child's gifts under a bushel, imo, to fail to hone those gifts to their fullest so that the adult our child becomes can use them to the fullest. It is awfully hard for an adult to make up for a namby-pamby education. 

 

I will give the author of the comment the benefit of the doubt, but I agree that given some segments of the homeschooling community who fancifully downplay the importance of a quality education that she should have crafted the quote with more care. 

[Mimm]

Just a couple weeks ago a homeschooling mom said in my hearing, "God's not going to care if they can add fractions." *sigh* This is true. There is no math test to get into heaven.

 

But I'm pretty sure God wants us, the parents, to provide as good an education to our children as we can. I'm sure he doesn't appreciate being used as an excuse to neglect school (and yes, this comment was in the context of neglecting school for a period of time for no real reason). If we're worried about what questions we might be asked in the afterlife, "What is 3/4 plus 1/6?" isn't going to be among them. But "Were you faithful in all your duties to the best of your abilities?" might be.

[Hyacinth]

Yet God rewarded people like Joseph and Job with riches, so he can't be altogether against wealth.

 

Absolutely agree.

[marbel]

What would it matter if he had set out to be wealthy? Wealthy and good are not mutually exclusive (not saying you said that) and I don't think many people become wealthy by accident. 

 

Sometimes these conversations sound too much like poverty being made out as a virtue and it isn't.

 

If healthy, wealthy and wise is an option, we'll take all three thanks!

 

Yeah, I see what you are saying. 

 

I guess... I don't want wealth to be my children's prime motivation in life.  I don't want them to be obsessed with the acquisition of more and more money.  That's what I mean.  I don't find poverty a virtue at all.  I also don't think wealthy people are evil.    I hope my children will find professions that are satisfying to them.  If they also become wealthy from that, great.  

 

Agree to the bolded, no question!  :-)

 

 

[HRAAB]

Just a couple weeks ago a homeschooling mom said in my hearing, "God's not going to care if they can add fractions." *sigh* This is true. There is no math test to get into heaven.

 

But I'm pretty sure God wants us, the parents, to provide as good an education to our children as we can. I'm sure he doesn't appreciate being used as an excuse to neglect school (and yes, this comment was in the context of neglecting school for a period of time for no real reason). If we're worried about what questions we might be asked in the afterlife, "What is 3/4 plus 1/6?" isn't going to be among them. But "Were you faithful in all your duties to the best of your abilities?" might be.

 

I remember the "heaven not Harvard" that was quoted frequently when I first started homeschooling. My response is still the same. It's not one or the other. My goal is good character, wisdom, discernment, and a rigorous education so they can pursue whatever career they want. It's a false dichotomy.

[DesertBlossom]

I think you're reading too much into that quote, unless there's more context I'm not aware of.

 

My main goal in homeschooling is teaching my children to be good, honest, God-fearing people. It's just a bonus that I also get to teach them academics, which at the moment happens to a bit ahead of theor grade level.

[Ms.Ivy]

I think that kind of quote bothers me because I have seen a lot of abuse of God's grace in the homeschool community -- using His mercy as an excuse to be lazy with academics.  

 

Some people seem to think that to have an ultimate goal of parenting (godly character) means you can't have any other goals (careers for your children).  The goal of homeschooling IS to prepare your children for life, and part of that life is usually a career.  The reason many choose to homeschool is so that academic pursuits don't interfere with the ultimate goal of helping our children become wise, discerning, and godly.  But that doesn't mean that there are no other goals for homeschooling.  I think that's the problem with the quote -- it should have said something like "Our only goal for homeschooling is not...."  (I'm not very good with English, so it probably still sounds clunky).  

It's frustrating to me because I see how many people think of laziness in academics as something to be proud of, because "God's grace will cover it" -- they think they should go on this way that "grace may abound."  These people have a false humility and "boast" in weaknesses of their own making, abusing passages such as 1 Cor. 1 to justify remaining "weak," so that God can make them strong.  Passages like 1 Cor. 1 remind us that God doesn't automatically save the accomplished of the world, but this doesn't mean that those who are less accomplished somehow get a leg up on salvation, and it's certainly not a recommendation to purposely be less accomplished in the world.  1 Tim. 2:15, points out that an unskilled worker has reason to be ashamed.  Proverbs 13:22 explicitly states that a good person leaves an inheritance for his grandchildren.  The pursuit of a career to fulfill that goal is part of being wise, not in conflict with it.  But a lot of Christians live in fear that worldly pursuits will automatically detract from spiritual pursuits, instead of seeing earthly pursuits as simply subservient to spiritual goals.

[JumpyTheFrog]

Somehow I have a hard time believing much wisdom is learned when a family gives their kids a subpar education in order to pursue "wisdom."

[Tsuga]

The problem with the quote is that raising a child who is discerning, kind, has integrity, or any other spiritual or character strength is not the goal of homeschooling; it is the goal of parenting.

 

As a Christian parent those are my goals. Full stop. If my children are in private school, public school, or homeschooled doesn't change those goals.

 

That was my thought exactly. And it's the same for most faiths or lack thereof.

[Ms.Ivy]

This is actually why I appreciate the Schole/teaching from rest concept... it's a good reminder that to "be anxious for nothing" doesn't mean to DO nothing, but to do academics without anxiousness. I think some people feel the anxiousness that can come from the responsibility to prepare our children for work in the world, and know that feeling is wrong, and wrongly think the solution is to avoid the work. Instead the solution is to do the work without anxiousness, knowing that God blesses our righteous efforts and the outcome is His responsibility.

[lllll]

nm

[HS Mom in NC]

Didn't read all the replies yet because I'm pressed for time right now.  I'll read them later.

 

This is the "Saints vs. Scholars" argument.  It's been around as long as homeschooling has and is often uttered by people are are actually anti-college, but not all of them are.  Some newbies buy into it and pass it on in their excitement without really thinking it all the way through as stated.

Of course each individual homeschooler has his/her individual goals, but why so many get stuck to just having one rather than both is beyond me.  I still roll my eyes at people who insist on one over the other, never considering that having both is possible.  If someone has to choose one or the other, they're doing it wrong.

 

On a related issue, some homeschoolers with a strong character focus sometimes forget that reading and talking about character isn't the same as having good character.  It just isn't.  It's a good thing to do and very important, but until it's applied in a real life scenarios, it's just theory.  Many homeschoolers already get this, but I've seen some blind to how obnoxious their kids are but if it's a discussion about character, their kids can parrot back all kinds of great stuff.

[LisaKinVA]

Didn't read all the replies yet because I'm pressed for time right now.  I'll read them later.

 

This is the "Saints vs. Scholars" argument.  It's been around as long as homeschooling has and is often uttered by people are are actually anti-college, but not all of them are.  Some newbies buy into it and pass it on in their excitement without really thinking it all the way through as stated.

 

Of course each individual homeschooler has his/her individual goals, but why so many get stuck to just having one rather than both is beyond me.  I still roll my eyes at people who insist on one over the other, never considering that having both is possible.  If someone has to choose one or the other, they're doing it wrong.

 

On a related issue, some homeschoolers with a strong character focus sometimes forget that reading and talking about character isn't the same as having good character.  It just isn't.  It's a good thing to do and very important, but until it's applied in a real life scenarios, it's just theory.  Many homeschoolers already get this, but I've seen some blind to how obnoxious their kids are but if it's a discussion about character, their kids can parrot back all kinds of great stuff.

 

This (Bolded) is what I said to my husband earlier.

[mamiof5]

Every homeschool is different? I embrace the flexibility homeschooling brings, and hope and pray that I am doing the best I can. I started homeschooling for many reasons, but yes, the main one is for my kids to know God and develop character. Doesn't mean I forego academics because of it. It is hard work to homeschool, no doubt. Yes, my kids' character and their knowledge of God comes first for me, but doesn't mean it replaces our academics. We strive hard to cover both. Easy? No. Doable? I sure hope so? I love to believe it is.

[SarahW]

"The goal is strong character, wisdom, and discernment to pursue the life God has called them to live."

 

That's the goal of Christian parenting. Just parenting.

 

Homeschooling has its own set of goals.

 

 

 

 

ETA:  This is by Jeannie Fulbright, author of the Apologia elementary books.  And, from poking around her FB page, I wasn't wrong in my interpretation.  I understand what she's saying -- but I cannot help but disagree.  She believes if you focus on spritual issues, that the education aspects (if that is God's plan) will essentially work themselves out.  Hmm...great...wonderful.  Kinda smacks of, if you just have enough faith, God will prevent your husband from dying, living you alone and unable to support your family, so no you silly woman, you don't need any education!

 

I don't understand people who confuse parenting and education, or people who confuse spiritual discipleship and teaching manners, or whatever. :shrug:

[Guest]

"The goal is strong character, wisdom, and discernment to pursue the life God has called them to live."

 

That's the goal of Christian parenting. Just parenting.

 

Homeschooling has its own set of goals.

 

 

 

I don't understand people who confuse parenting and education, or people who confuse spiritual discipleship and teaching manners, or whatever. :shrug:

That might be because as homeschoolers we tend to wear both hats at once for the big part of every day: parent and teacher. It's not so easy to say, well, this is where my parenting ends and teaching begins.

Absolutely not to say that B&M parents wouldn't say the same thing....but this is a homeschooling board and I'm not qualified to comment on a different situation.

[BlsdMama]

 

Because, my personal beef with this is that I believe the natural BYPRODUCTS of a rigorous, Christian, homeschool education are a strong character, wisdom and discernment.  (I say byproducts, because IMO, a child learns strong character by having to work through and struggle with difficult physical and mental tasks, wisdom and discernment by learning the Word of God, and then applying it to life, and to their studies of literature, philosophy, history, current events, science, etc. ) They are not mutually exclusive, but actually take place concurrently.

 

I have just heard sentiments like this mostly used by people who wish to justify NOT having (or even attempting) a rigorous education (and my definition of rigor is somewhat fluid, as it is tailored to the child and family -- but certainly means providing the best education one can to any child based upon their ability, family finances, time...etc.). 

 

 

 

Do I agree?  Yes and no.  

 

I  do *not* believe the by-product of a rigorous, Christian, homeschool education is strong character, wisdom, or discernment.

 

I think to do anything WELL, you must teach it explicitly.  

 

While I absolutely agree that some people use this as an excuse to not give their children a rigorous education, I think many people use a rigorous education as an excuse (only so much time) to not teach wisdom, character, or discernment.  Yes?  Yes.

 

I firmly believe my *first* obligation is a solid Christian worldview as their foundation and that foundation isn't simply laid when they are little - it is an ongoing building.

I also firmly believe we have an obligation to prepare our kids, which means strong academics.  But do realize "strong" academics means a lot of different things to different people.  I want my children to be able to think, read deeply, analyze, form an argument, and be able to argue and clearly articulate their beliefs.  To some, a strong preparation means getting high marks on textbooks.   Just as "preparing" a child with strong character certainly has no measuring stick for many.

 

It's just a tricky discussion. ;)

[Mommy22alyns]

Just a couple weeks ago a homeschooling mom said in my hearing, "God's not going to care if they can add fractions." *sigh* This is true. There is no math test to get into heaven.

 

But I'm pretty sure God wants us, the parents, to provide as good an education to our children as we can. I'm sure he doesn't appreciate being used as an excuse to neglect school (and yes, this comment was in the context of neglecting school for a period of time for no real reason). If we're worried about what questions we might be asked in the afterlife, "What is 3/4 plus 1/6?" isn't going to be among them. But "Were you faithful in all your duties to the best of your abilities?" might be.

 

 

Yes!!!  So very well said.

[abba12]

"The goal is strong character, wisdom, and discernment to pursue the life God has called them to live."

 

That's the goal of Christian parenting. Just parenting.

 

Homeschooling has its own set of goals.

 

 

I'd say that the goal of PARENTING, first, is to raise children who love and serve God in whatever they do.

 

I'd say that the goal of HOMESCHOOLING is to help my children to use their God-given abilities to learn and to prepare for whatever future adult life God will call them to do.

 

 

I think these opinions are coming from a 'school and homeschool are equal but different' perspective. Which is fine, but it doesn't apply for me. 

 

Some (but certainly not all) of the reasons we homeschool are...

So that our children s primary influence are their Christian parents, not their teachers of varying faiths, or equally 'foolish' youth. 

So that our children do not seek to imitate the 'popular', but rather the 'good'

So that in the early years we can be more involved in their influences and exposure to things

So that they are not exposed, without guidance, to things they are too young for

So that we can foster the sort of relationship where I know what is happening for them and can help guide them

So that bullies and the ideas of society do not break their self-esteem or their still-forming convictions. 

 

These things are much harder to do when a child attends a school 6-8 hours a day, and I would argue for some personalities, those given to popularity and people-pleasing, entirely impossible. That's a controversial statement, I am aware.

 

So for us, homeschooling is a vital element in raising our kids with wisdom and character. The first and primary reason we homeschool is to assist in developing and raising children who love God. While those are also parenting goals, they are the first goal of our homeschooling because they are the reason we do it to begin with! If that wasn't our goal, we probably wouldn't be doing it!

 

Within this perspective, academics is a secondary goal. A vital one, one I place huge importance on. I, too, do not take days off for 'character issues' or think 'God wont care if they can add fractions' (he certainly will care if he intends that child to be the one to cure cancer!) I have various beliefs about educational theory and development. I study how to best reach and teach my kids. But if the best school in the country opened up on my street, I would still not send my children, because my goal is not academics, and the best school in the country could not assist or better my goals in homeschooling. (though, if they offer part time enrolment for some classes..... :laugh: )

[texasmama]

"The goal of homeschooling is not a rigorous education so they can pursue an illustrious career. The goal is strong character, wisdom, and discernment to pursue the life God has called them to live."

 

It's a clunky statement. I think it's worth focusing on the "pursue an illustrious career" part. Christians are reminded not to put riches above the kingdom of God (the love of money and all that). So maybe she's saying something like "The goal of homeschooling isn't to produce a child who chases wealth but, rather, one who chases the things of God."

 

I don't know. Like I said, it's clunky. And, really, for a Christian, isn't that the goal regardless of how a family educates?

I think this is what the author of the quote was getting at, if I could guess.  And I can.

 

It did not hit me the way it hit the OP.  If she had stated "the goal of homeschooling is not a rigorous education" and not qualified it, that is a different message, IMO, than qualifying it with "so they can pursue an illustrious career.

 

My philosophy as a parent and a Christian and a homeschooler (because they are inextricably intertwined) is that if I provide what my kids need to grow as people (in all ways, including educationally), and stay out the way, they will grow into the people God created them to be.  That philosophy is not very different from many non-Christian homeschoolers, only they would say "the people they are intended to be" or "the people they want to be" or "reach the potential they have" or a version of that, I would suppose.  

 

I strongly dislike the Christian circles which are trying to produce mini-me's or a particular brand of Christian robot  (Gothardites, for example).  I don't dislike many of the people because I think they are simply ill-informed and deluded, and that is very sad to me.  But I dislike the philosophies that if you teach them this and that and keep them from this and that then it will produce a :"product".

 

So those are my thoughts.

[texasmama]

What would it matter if he had set out to be wealthy? Wealthy and good are not mutually exclusive (not saying you said that) and I don't think many people become wealthy by accident. 

 

Sometimes these conversations sound too much like poverty being made out as a virtue and it isn't.

 

If healthy, wealthy and wise is an option, we'll take all three thanks!

Absolutely.

[Ms.Ivy]

I think these opinions are coming from a 'school and homeschool are equal but different' perspective. Which is fine, but it doesn't apply for me.

 

Some (but certainly not all) of the reasons we homeschool are...

So that our children s primary influence are their Christian parents, not their teachers of varying faiths, or equally 'foolish' youth.

So that our children do not seek to imitate the 'popular', but rather the 'good'

So that in the early years we can be more involved in their influences and exposure to things

So that they are not exposed, without guidance, to things they are too young for

So that we can foster the sort of relationship where I know what is happening for them and can help guide them

So that bullies and the ideas of society do not break their self-esteem or their still-forming convictions.

 

These things are much harder to do when a child attends a school 6-8 hours a day, and I would argue for some personalities, those given to popularity and people-pleasing, entirely impossible. That's a controversial statement, I am aware.

 

So for us, homeschooling is a vital element in raising our kids with wisdom and character. The first and primary reason we homeschool is to assist in developing and raising children who love God. While those are also parenting goals, they are the first goal of our homeschooling because they are the reason we do it to begin with! If that wasn't our goal, we probably wouldn't be doing it!

 

Within this perspective, academics is a secondary goal. A vital one, one I place huge importance on. I, too, do not take days off for 'character issues' or think 'God wont care if they can add fractions' (he certainly will care if he intends that child to be the one to cure cancer!) I have various beliefs about educational theory and development. I study how to best reach and teach my kids. But if the best school in the country opened up on my street, I would still not send my children, because my goal is not academics, and the best school in the country could not assist or better my goals in homeschooling. (though, if they offer part time enrolment for some classes..... [emoji23] )

I think the difference is how you interpret the unspoken alternative to homeschooling... one may think "the reason I homeschool [as opposed to public school] is for my kid's spiritual development" while someone else thinks, "the reason I homeschool [as opposed to having my kids babysit siblings all day] is so they can earn a living as adults." The problem is not that the spiritual health of children is the primary goal for homeschooling, but in thinking that there are no other reasons to homeschool, ESPECIALLY for those communities of Christians who believe that public school is not an option at all. The way the quote was phrased can be interpreted to justify educational neglect, and I've heard and seen it done. I really believe that those of us who do take education seriously need to nip these things in the bud and bring social pressure to change those who use spirituality to justify laziness.

[abba12]

I think the difference is how you interpret the unspoken alternative to homeschooling... one may think "the reason I homeschool [as opposed to public school] is for my kid's spiritual development" while someone else thinks, "the reason I homeschool [as opposed to having my kids babysit siblings all day] is so they can earn a living as adults." The problem is not that the spiritual health of children is the primary goal for homeschooling, but in thinking that there are no other reasons to homeschool, ESPECIALLY for those communities of Christians who believe that public school is not an option at all. The way the quote was phrased can be interpreted to justify educational neglect, and I've heard and seen it done. I really believe that those of us who do take education seriously need to nip these things in the bud and bring social pressure to change those who use spirituality to justify laziness.

 

I did state, in that post and in above posts, that I understand entirely the issue of educational neglect. My husband and I were homeschooled in the 90s, He was entirely neglected academically after about 6th grade, I fared a little better. Many of our friends were also from such families. One of those families is currently travelling the country waiting for the end times, all unemployed. I totally get educational neglect in the name of religion because I've lived it. I hate it and I do my best to speak out about it.

 

But I also have no problem with this quote, because as important as academics are, for SOME families, such as mine, they will always come second. Just because something can be misquoted and used negatively doesn't mean the quote itself is wrong or bad when taken within it's intended context. People can interpret the bible to say many awful things, does that mean the bible itself is bad? People interpret political speeches to indicate conspiracy theories, does that mean the speeches are bad?

 

I totally condemn anyone who believes academics is unimportant. My MIL has learned never to speak to me about homeschooling because I don't consider handing an 11 year old a trigonometry book and telling them to learn to be education, But I'm not going to condemn a comment which, taken within it's intended context, is entirely accurate and encouraging for my family, just because some people choose to take it incorrectly. This quote is from a curriculum writer if I understand correctly. Now whatever you think of their curriculum (and, perhaps it doesn't go quite deep enough at times, it's not a curriculum I will be using personally) they're obviously not petitioning for children to never learn fractions. If this came from someone publishing child rearing books then people here might have a point, but it's coming from a curriculum writer, they aren't anti-academics! They just have their priorities in order, as far as I'm concerned. 

 

Anything can be taken out of context by people who want to read something else into it. I don't think we can or should constantly structure our speech in order to avoid those people. She expected her comment to be read within a certain context, as someone who spends most of their time promoting academics through their curriculum, and many people read it within that context and are encouraged by it. 

[Bluegoat]

I'm pretty much fine with the quote as said. 

 

I wouldn't tend to make the differentiation some are between schooling and parenting.  The  former is a subsidiary part of the latter, IMO.

 

I think its important to keep a sense of the hierarchy of our priorities.  Formal and informal education is directed to the whole formation of the person.  What that means is that 'rigour" that in any way doesn't tend toward that goal, or worse, moves away from it, is a problem.  It is absolutely possible for a rigourous education to set a child on a path away from wisdom or kindness or responsibility.

 

I also think it is very easy to get caught up in the idea of rigour as some sort of external. A particular set of knowledge that we pour into the child and if we do so successfully, presto, there is an educated child.  I think a good education is not external to the child.  What it looks like will depend on that child, his season in life, the kind of environment and life he will be living. 

 

To quote Charlotte Mason, who I don't think could be accused of leaving her students with a wishy-washy education “This idea of all education springing from and resting upon our relation to Almighty God-we do not merely give a religious education because that would seem to imply the possibility of some other education, a secular education, for example. But we hold that all education is divine, that every good gift of knowledge and insight comes from above, that the Lord the Holy Spirit is the supreme educator of mankind, and that the culmination of all education (which may at the same time be reached by a little child) is that personal knowledge of and intimacy with God in which our being finds its fullest perfection.â€

[HS Mom in NC]

As I stated up thread, there is no legitimate reason to choose between character/religious training and academics.  This reply is based on the assertion that they are equally important and neither should be sacrificed for the other.

 

So this is my cue to have us all revisit the deal cut on our behalf by homeschoolers who came ahead of us. Let's remember that homeschooling is a legal term.  That legal option became available in each state (and I assume in each country) when the legislature basically said, "As long as homeschoolers provide the same or better ACADEMICS as the public schools, we're willing to make it legal."  At no point did any legislator have in mind the idea that as long as just character and/or religious training was covered thoroughly they were cool with it.  As a matter of fact, at no point did character or religious training come into play as those laws were passed.  I wasn't there, but that's my understanding of the mindset and laws.  When you read the laws in regulated states, I'm pretty sure character and religious training are not requirements in any of them.  The government doesn't give a rip about character or religious training in homeschools because the government doesn't see those things as its business. That's a private and optional matter for individual parents, not part of the legally recognized form of schooling called homeschooling. When people are prosecuted for educational neglect, I'm fairly sure it's not because of a gaping void in the child's character and or religious training.

 

Homeschoolers failing to provide academics equal to the public schools are jeopardizing homeschooling as an option for everyone in the future.  They will be the examples future legislators, lobbyists,college professors, highly skilled labor instructors/trainers, military personnel, and others will use to get legislators and the public turned against homeschooling. Homeschoolers who didn't think academics were just as much the goal of homeschooling and chose to focus on character or religious training so much that their children were not as academically prepared as public schooled kids will be given the blame, and rightly so, when in the future people ask us, "Didn't you used to do that thing...what was it called...Then one where your kids do school at home....uh...homeschooling.  Whatever happened to that?"  The answer won't be what happened to homeschooling, it will be who happened to homeschooling.  Who failed to hold up their end of the deal early homeschoolers fought so hard for. 

[HS Mom in NC]

As to the quote itself, I agree that an illustrious career shouldn't be the goal of an education.  The goal of an education should be preparation for adulthood.  I agree that public schools aren't allowed to prep much in character department because you get into values if you go very deep and those tend to have philosophical and religious underpinnings.  Of course we don't want public schools to be religious and because of that they can't cover spirituality.  They can only cover academics and some life skills for college, skills training, the military, and maybe some business related things.

 

The reason so many of us are reacting so strongly to the quote is because we've met homeschoolers IRL who interpreted that quote and quotes like them to mean that neglecting academics for character and religious training is somehow God honoring. It isn't.  They've used it to justify not sending kids to college when college makes sense for those kids.  They've used it to justify handicapping their children because they're not academically prepared for college, skills training, military, or business, but they can quote lots of Bible verses and make lots of theological and denominational arguments. That's a real problem.

[shage]

As I stated up thread, there is no legitimate reason to choose between character/religious training and academics.  This reply is based on the assertion that they are equally important and neither should be sacrificed for the other.

 

So this is my cue to have us all revisit the deal cut on our behalf by homeschoolers who came ahead of us. Let's remember that homeschooling is a legal term.  That legal option became available in each state (and I assume in each country) when the legislature basically said, "As long as homeschoolers provide the same or better ACADEMICS as the public schools, we're willing to make it legal."  At no point did any legislator have in mind the idea that as long as just character and/or religious training was covered thoroughly they were cool with it.  As a matter of fact, at no point did character or religious training come into play as those laws were passed.  I wasn't there, but that's my understanding of the mindset and laws.  When you read the laws in regulated states, I'm pretty sure character and religious training are not requirements in any of them.  The government doesn't give a rip about character or religious training in homeschools because the government doesn't see those things as its business. That's a private and optional matter for individual parents, not part of the legally recognized form of schooling called homeschooling. When people are prosecuted for educational neglect, I'm fairly sure it's not because of a gaping void in the child's character and or religious training.

 

Homeschoolers failing to provide academics equal to the public schools are jeopardizing homeschooling as an option for everyone in the future.  They will be the examples future legislators, lobbyists,college professors, highly skilled labor instructors/trainers, military personnel, and others will use to get legislators and the public turned against homeschooling. Homeschoolers who didn't think academics were just as much the goal of homeschooling and chose to focus on character or religious training so much that their children were not as academically prepared as public schooled kids will be given the blame, and rightly so, when in the future people ask us, "Didn't you used to do that thing...what was it called...Then one where your kids do school at home....uh...homeschooling.  Whatever happened to that?"  The answer won't be what happened to homeschooling, it will be who happened to homeschooling.  Who failed to hold up their end of the deal early homeschoolers fought so hard for. 

Serious question regarding the text in red.  Is this accurate?  I have been researching the history of homeschooling laws in various states and it seems to me that there were various approaches to legalization.  In some states it was written in as an "equivalent alternative" to compulsory education laws much as you describe.  But in other states, it seems to have been granted on either grounds of due process (14th amendment) or religious freedom (1st amendment) or some combination thereof. 

 

In some parts of the country is does seem to me that legislators and courts are cool with religious training provided the children are not becoming an economic burden on the state.  Which means the outcome of concern is not distinctly academic but economic.

 

I'm honestly not sure where I am going with this except the legal situation seems far more complex and nuanced and varied than I realized.

 

I tend to agree with you that there may be changes in oversight coming down the pike but I honestly can't figure out which way this will go.  (We live in a state that does NOT legally define homeschooling, hence there is a lack of even basic demographic information about homeschooling families.)