George Bush’s secret army
A revolution is happening in American education.
As it grows in size, it should frighten teacher s everywhere.
JUST HOW BAD ARE AMERICAN SCHOOLS?
And how deeply do conservative Americans distrust their government?
One answer to both these questions is provided by the growth of home- schooling. As many as 2m American students—one in 25—may now be being taught at home.
The growth of home-schooling is all the more remarkable when you consider two facts. The first is the commitment of the parents. They give up not just a free public education, but also often the chance of a second income as well, because one parent (usually the mother) has to stay at home to educate the children.
The next (second) is that the practice challenges most of the assumptions behind public education. For most of the past 150 years, compulsory mass education has been the hallmark of a civilized society. Sociologists such as Max Weber have hailed the state’s domination of education as a natural corollary of “modernization”. Yet in the most advanced country on the planet (on many measures), more than 2m parents insist that education ought to be the work of the family. How has this come about?
The 2m figure comes from the Home School Legal Defense Association. The most recent (1999) survey by the Department of Education put the number at only 850,000. The chances are that the HSIDA is closer to the truth. Rod Paige, the education secretary, uses its figure in his speeches, and, although home-schoolers tend to refuse to answer government surveys, a wealth of anecdotal evidence suggests that home-schooling is on the rise.
The market for teaching materials and supplies for home-schoolers is worth at least $850 m a year. Mor e than three-quarters (75 %) of universities now have policies for dealing with home-schooled children. Support networks have sprung up in hundreds of towns and cities across the country to allow parents to do every-thing from establishing science labs to forming sports teams and defending their rights and reputation. When J .C. Penney started selling a T-shirt in 2001 that featured “Home Skooled” with a picture of a trailer home, the store faced so many complaints that it withdrew the item from sale.
Home-schooling is a fairly recent phenomenon. When Ronald Reagan came to power, in 1981, it was illegal for parents to teach their own children in most states. Today it is a legal right in all 50 states. Twenty-eight states require home- schooled children to undergo some kind of official evaluation, either by taking standardized tests or submitting a portfolio of work. Thirteen states simply require parents to inform officials that they are going to teach their children at home. In Texas, a parent doesn’t have to tell anyone anything.
The main reason why legal restrictions on home-schooling have been swept away across so much of America is the power of the Christian right. Not all home-schoolers, of course, are religious conservatives. One of the first advocates of home- schooling, John Holt, was a left-winger who regarded schools as instruments of the bureaucratic-industrial complex. A lively subdivision of the home-school movement, called “unschooling”, argues that children should more or less be left to educate themselves. And the number of black home-schoolers is growing rapidly.
Yet the Praetorian Guard of the home-schooling movement are social conservatives. They turned to home-schooling in the 1970s in response to what they saw as the school system’s lurch to the secular left—and they still provide most of the movement’s political muscle on Capitol Hill. Senator Rick Santorum home- schools his children—or, rather, his wife does. Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave, sponsored a bill to clear up various legal confusions about grants and scholarships for home-schooled children.
George Bush has tried hard to keep home-schoolers on his side. During the 2000 campaign, he said: “In Texas we view home-schooling as something to be respected and something to be protected. Respected for the energy and commitment of loving mothers and loving fathers. Protected from the interference of government.” As president, he has held several receptions for home-schooled children in the White House.
Just as the teachers’ unions provide so many of the Democrats’ volunteers, home- schoolers are important Republican foot-soldiers. According to the HSLDA, 76% of home-schooled young people aged 18-24 vote in elections, compared with 29% in that age group in the general population. Home-schoolers are also significantly more likely to contribute to political campaigns and to work for candidates—normally Republican ones.
AN EDUCATION THAT WORKS
So there is certainly an ideological edge to many home-schoolers. But do not be misled. First, this is a bottom-up movement with parents of whatever political stripe making individual decisions to withdraw their children (rather than following orders from higher up) . Second, the movement has a utilitarian edge. Home- schoolers simply believe that they can offer their children better education at home
One-to-one tuition, goes the argument, enables children to go at their own pace, rather than at a pace set for the convenience of teaching unions. And children can be taught “proper” subjects based on the Judeo-Christian tradition of learning, rather than politically correct flimflam. Some home-schoolers favor the classical notion of the trivium, with its three stages of grammar, dialectic and rhetoric (which requires children to learn Greek and Latin).
This sounds backward-looking but home-schoolers claim that technology is on their side. The internet is making it ever easier to teach people at home, ever more teaching materials are available, and virtual communities now exist that allow all home-schooler to swap information.
The other factor working in home-schooling’s favor is its own success. Many parents have been nervous about home-schooled children being isolated. With almost every town in America now boasting its ow home-schooling network, that worry really declines. Home-schooled children can play baseball with other home-schooled children; they go on school trips and so on.
What about academic standards? The home-schooling network buzzes with good news: a family with three home-schooled children at Harvard ; a home-schooled child with a best-selling novel; first, second and third place in the 2000 National Spelling Bee; a first university for home-schooled children (see next story). System -atic evidence is more difficult to find.
There are certainly signs that home-schoolers are thriving . One recent survey by the HSLDA showed that three-quarters (75 %) of home-educated adults aged 18-24 have taken college level courses compared with 46% of the general population But this is hardly conclusive. Home-schoolers do not have to report bad results. Moreover, home-schoolers may simply come from the more educated part of the population.
Yet these arguments point to change in the way the debate is unfolding . It is no longer about whether home-schooled children are losing out, or whether they are doing unfairly well . “Maybe we should subcontract all of public education to home-schooler? Bill Bennett Pres. Reagan’s education secretary, once wondered mischievously. That looks unlikely. But America’s home-schoolers represent an assault on public education that teachers everywhere should pay attention to.
DREAMING of SPIRES.
A UNIVERSITY FOR HOME-SCHOOLERS.
I F ANY BUILDING SYMBOLIZES THE AMBITION OF THE HOME -SCHOOLING MOVEMENT, IT IS PATRICK HENRY COLLEGE IN SUBURBAN VIRGINIA. This conservative university, which opened in 2000, may have only 242 students; but it plans to expand its undergraduate school to 1,600 and to add a law school of 400. More than four in five of its students are home-schooled.
The college’s two passions are “liberty and God”. Its walls are covered with portraits of the Founding Fathers, with dormitories named after their houses (Monticello, Mount Vernon and so on). Although lively debate goes on between the college’s Jeffersonians and Hamiltonians about exactly how small the govern-ment should be, the general idea is that it should be tiny. The college gets no gov-ernment money.
Yet religion is also omnipresent. The ubiquitous pictures of the Founding Fathers often show them in prayer: Washington, for example, on bended knee at Valley Forge. The college has copies of the first prayer said in Congress. One of its roads is called “Covenant Drive”. Student applicants have to write an essay describing their “relationship with Jesus Christ and [their] personal walk of faith”, and the professors sign a “Statement of Biblical Worldview” that emphasizes the literal truth of the Virgin birth and the creationists’ ac count of the origins of the universe. Alcohol and tobacco are banned, and students are strongly encouraged to involve their parents if they start a relationship with another student. The college’s founder, Michael Farris, describes the place as “a refuge from sex, drugs and rock ‘n’ roll. Well, at least sex and drugs.”
The college wants to produce not just good Christians, but effective ones. “Just as your parents’ calling was to turn around a generation for Christ,” Mr Farris tells his charges, “your calling is to turn our nation back to a Godly foundation.” The academic dean, Paul Bonicelli, thinks that Christian schools ought to put as much emphasis on academic excellence as on spiritual values. Patrick Henry’s curriculum includes philosophy, logic, a foreign language, history, biblical studies, economics, literature, sciences, Euclidian geometry and classical Greek or Latin.
The students practice confronting alternative world views. One student mounted a successful campaign, as part of his college course, to close the adult section of a local video store . “I do not want a graduate’s first encounter with nihilism or materialism to be at a banquet on Capitol Hill surrounded by atheists and worldly antagonists,” says Robert Stacey, chairman of the government department. Students have been dispatched to work as interns in Karl Rove’s White House office and on Capitol Hill, and one graduate now works in Paul Bremer’s office in Iraq. The college is also considering setting up a film school, having already brought in members of a Christian screenwriter’ group in Hollywood to teach a class in screen writing.
Despite this abiding sense of mission, the students are far from identikit conservatives. Steven, for instance, who was home-schooled in Midland, Texas, litters his conversation with references to Michel Foucault and is so worried about his home state’s “over-application” of the death penalty that he wants to get a job with an organization that seeks to reform, though not abolish, it. Several students admit to being puzzled by much of George Bush’s foreign policy and by the divisions between America and Europe.
That said, their political sympathies are clearly with the president . “I just like the guy,” explains Abigail, who thanks God that Pres. Bush was in office on September 11th. Kristen hopes to work for the Bush re-election campaign, and in the longer term she plans to focus on foreign policy. She believes that Christians have opted out of the debate, and should use their God-given talents to reshape global institutions in the same way as they have remoulded domestic policy.
Patrick Henry makes no secret of its links with the wider conservative movement. There are signed Christmas cards from the Bushes. Ian Slatter, the college’s press officer, used to work for the Weekly Standard, a conservative magazine. Mr Bonicelli displays a National Review cover showing John Ashcroft with devil’s horns under the slogan “Every liberal’s favorite devil”, with the picture signed by the Devil himself. Mr Ashcroft’s wife is on Patrick Henry’s board of trustees.
The ECONOMIST Magazine
February 28th - March 5 , 2004 (pgs. 32 - 33)
Return to the words of wisdom, Pot Luck index..
Church of the Science of God
La Jolla, California 92038-3131
© Church of the Science of GOD, 1993