Home is THE place for school
Recently I read the most nonsensical attack on Home Schooling to date (and believe me there have been some doozies) written by Dennis L. Evans, a director of doctoral programs in education at leadership at UC, Irvine. With all due respect, Dennis Evans couldn't pour water out of a bucket if the directions were on the bottom.
Dennis's article "Home is no place for school", lays out a series of unsubstantiated attacks. Most of them are the same old, unproven and baseless charges leveled against the home schooling movement that the NEA and it's ardent sycophants continue to advance in a mantra-like chant. Perhaps if they had received a decent education, they might be capable of critical thought or better yet, of researching their thesis.
In light of the fact that home schooled students outperform the public school students academically and have superior communication and social skills, one wonders exactly where the problem is that Dennis is upset about. Those of us who have dealt with the educrats realize that of course there is an ulterior motive in their attacks, but more on that later.
Dennis begins his assault on proper education by labeling the notion that "anyone can teach" as "misguided". Apparently the tens of thousands of home schooling parents out there who have in fact taught their children, and taught them much better than the public school systems does not register with educrats like Dennis. Dennis cites research on student achievement as being linked to "teacher competency" but fails to explain just what this rather vague statement actually means.
Could it be that teacher competency is linked to teacher compassion, specifically the compassion that parents have (or should have) for their own children? The empirical data suggests that home schooling parents, who lack advanced, educratic degrees but manage to turn out students that out perform the public school students, are more than competent. If teacher competency is measured by actual graduates and educated students then this statement is a compliment for all home schooling parents and a bitter condemntation of the entire public school system.
As I predicted though, Dennis abandons his groundless charge of academic inferiority and gets to his real problem with home schooling. It seems Dennis and his ilk are more concerned with the "socialization" of our children. Dennis admits that, "Attending school is an important element in the development of the 'whole child'". Yes, Dennis, we've seen the snot nosed, ill trained, undisciplined, violent and under-educated "whole children" your public school gulags produce, that's why the home schooling movement is growing.
Dennis then goes on to regurgitate the usual pap about "diversity" which means homosexuality and perversion are good and Christianity is bad. Mind-numbing socialist behavior is reinforced and independent thinking is quashed, producing the sort of zombies that will regurgitate the party line, just like Dennis.
Dennis then goes on to display his ignorance of home schooling by claiming that "isolation" is "implicit in home teaching" and that this "is anathema to socialization and citizenship". Apparently, Dennis has never actually met a home schooling family or spoken to the children (most of whom would display a much more advanced thought process than Dennis has by the age of 10). If Dennis had actually done a little research on his article (I hope that he encourages his doctoral students to research their thesis), he would have found such information readily available although it would have dismembered his rather weak and pathetic thesis. Obviously, in the new Amerika of Dennis and his socialist friends, independent and well educated children will be a problem, after all, they tend to make good citizens but poor subjects.
And finally, Dennis gets to the real problem he has with home schooling. "It is a rejection of community and makes the home-schooler the captive of the orthodoxies of the parents."
Bingo Dennis, you figured it out!
In fact, we do reject community, not all community but specifically the God rejecting, anti-Christian bigotry of hate filled zealots such as yourself. We do reject the community that declares good is evil and evil is good, that refuses to tolerate our intolerance of evil practices and behavior. We reject further the community that seeks to strip us of our freedom and replace it with a socialist dependence on an intrusive and expansive federal government.
We also admit that our children are captive to our orthodoxies and that's why we don't send them to your public gulags masquerading as educational facilities. We have seen all too well the orthodoxies that you and other educrats will expose our children to. We believe it is better to expose them to the orthodoxies that teach absolute truth, morals and Godly values than to allow you to preach your secular humanist agenda to them.
In closing, Dennis rather lamely offers an obscure quote that he no doubt pulled of the Internet " ''It is one thing to shun schools entirely, another to choose from them.'' Quintilian (A.D. 95). If Dennis would have bothered to analyze the quote, he would have seen that home schoolers are not shunning schools entirely, they are in fact choosing to have schools at home, a concept that Dennis can not grasp, despite the overwhelming evidence clearly in front of him.
But I must say, I have to agree with Dennis on one point, my children's social skills have turned out two young men who actually understand the Constitution and believe we are being fraudulently taxed into poverty. My sons treat their elders with respect and can hold intelligent conversations, comfortably, with all age groups. My sons also practice the manly virtue of chastity and abstinence, saving themselves for their marriage.
In Dennis's view for a socialist Amerika, my sons are certainly not socialized for their role as obedient slaves to the state. My home schooled sons were raised to be American citizens, free men, and that is the greatest irritant to the socialist educrats like Dennis Evans.
State Chairman, Constitution Party of Texas
7 September 2003
Al Lorentz is a Fundamentalist Christian and the State Chairman of the Constitution Party of Texas
Al Lorentz's Bio.
|When honest people who hold strong opinions come together, it is natural that they state their opinions, and that those opinions occasionally clash. The articles that you see on this website represent the opinion of the writers, and are not the official opinion of this party. To see the official party position on any question, the reader is referred to the Party Platform.|
Permission to reprint/republish granted, as long as you include the name of our site, the author,and our URL. www.cptexas.org. All CP Texas reports, and all editorials are property of The Constitution Party of Texas © 2002 (unless otherwise noted).
Previous Articles by Al Lorentz