This is true for kids as well as adults. I started homeschooling as a child because of some health issues, and it was stunning (to my parents mostly) how much more efficient learning could be when your day wasn’t full of empty space, and your schedule was actually organized to be the best for you rather than for other people.
I’ve carried that lesson throughout my life. You can do a lot more, in a lot less time, when you’re in charge of your own time.
This was pretty clear when our kids were all sent home during Covid. We pushed very far ahead using Khan academy. Keeping it simple with basic math, reading, and writing.
About halfway through Covid schools started sending home this work they wanted the kids to do. 80% was a waist of time.
I never really thought about it till then, but primary school is basically babysitting where they happen to do some learning as well.
You know, I overlook a lot of grammatical errors, and I usually don't like to be that guy, but when it's an "oh look how smart I am" type post I can't help myself. It should be waste of time, not waist.
haha, I'm not offended, and I _am_ a terrible speller. I didn't mean to sound super smart, I just parked the kids in front of Khan academy and did some reading with them.
I was trying to point out actually how simple it was to be better that what the schools were sending home.
And I don't really disagree with you. I think Covid proved that childcare is indeed a major component of school. I doubt that a public school or all but the most expensive private schools have much ability to tailor education to the individual needs of children.
I would also like to add that I have a lot of respect for my children's teachers. Having such a wide variety of skills and talents in a class of 9 and 10 year olds must be very challenging.
Can't wait for sentence level autocorrect to appear. Because doing it at word level is not enough.
I mean, ok, swipe typing has been a great improvement. But depending on the keyboard it manages to do stupid crap even at word level (like suggesting a 8 letter word if you just "typed" 3 letters)
Then I will have to be the annoying person who points out that English is not a prescriptive language and that the more we push for incorrect spelling the more correct it will be.
Anyway English is an ugly hack of a language, the more we mispell it, the better chance we have to get it fixed to something closer to Esperanto.
I’m very interested in home schooling for this reason but am concerned about two things: both my wife and I work, and social interaction for my son with kids his age. Trying to think about solutions for both of these. Advice?
I used to work at a YMCA, and I taught PE for local homeschool kids. They would come every-other Thursday or something, and we did swimming, rock climbing, badminton, and a bunch of other stuff.
That's a start, but I'll say that homeschool kids are a bit off, socially. It's not always a bad thing, but it's noticeable. And, a few don't have that problem--I think it's the kids with a lot of interaction, like on sports teams etc. Honestly, a lot of the weirdness of those kids was often that they just seemed very grown up. They interacted a LOT more in 1-on-1 conversations with adults than most kids do. Nearly all of them seemed smart for their age.
Scouts, karate, MTG clubs are some ideas. Honestly, gaming? In our lives I'm sure a lot of social activity will move to some virtual spaces, maybe VR etc.
> They interacted a LOT more in 1-on-1 conversations with adults than most kids do.
That's not really a surprising result, is it? Most kids spend all day at school being told not to talk unless called on; plenty even spend most of their day at home like that (at least with the adults in their lives, parents "I'm too busy" and such)...
> Scouts, karate, MTG clubs are some ideas
Yeah, there were definitely a lot of kids in cub and boy scouts who were home schooled when I was growing up. For the religious folks, church and church events had an outsize proportion of homeschool kids as well (I suspect cause and effect goes both ways there). It's likely the homeschool community in your area also coordinates social events (even if it's just going to a park).
No, not surprising at all. In my time at the YMCA (in non-homeschool areas), I often found that new kids were not used to talking with adults, like me--their "group leader." At home, mostly they ate dinner and went to bed. At school, you just don't get one-on-one time, especially just to chat about yourself or off-curriculum topics.
> I'll say that homeschool kids are a bit off, socially.
Nice anecdote. My experience is the exact opposite. The ~20 home schooled kids I know are the most socially adept kids I've ever met. They aren't shy. They hold nice conversations. They actually like talking to a mix of people.
I think they're the most socially adept kids when speaking with adults, and the most socially inept when hanging with other kids, particularly medium-to-large groups. On average. I knew plenty of them who didn't fit the mold.
I'll echo some of the other posters here in saying that homeschooled kids are usually shockingly good at holding conversations with adults for their age. Not being in an institutional environment where you only really talk to schoolteachers means they get a lot more practice having normal conversations with adults. That was a benefit for me in my later teenage years for sure as I transitioned into the grown-up world.
As a child homeschooled since 5 years old myself: _do not do it_.
Any academic gains are not worth the social stunting, especially if the child is already shy.
Happiness in life is rarely based on academic achievements, but rather on the relationships we build. These relationships are built through social skills, and our interactions with our fellow man. Homeschooling severely stunts this at a very vulnerable time in a child’s life.
I went to a science and tech magnet school for HS, so there were a fair number of homeschooled kids. By winter break freshman year, you couldn't tell most of the homeschooled kids from the rest.
In at least two of the exceptions, the kids were specifically homeschooled because they were getting picked on in public school for being socially awkward.
Counterfactuals are difficult; I was far more socially awkward than most of the kids in t high school that were homeschooled, and I was in public school from kindergarten.
I think it is true that parents home schooling their kids ought not neglect social and emotional skills any more than they should neglect science or math.
The thing is, you don't know that you would be better off socially had you gone down the normal path.
School suppresses kids and forces them to conform. That's probably the thing it does more strongly than anything else. And it does it even more strongly to shy kids.
So you might've missed out on deep friendships, but maybe not. And you almost assuredly missed out on bullying (physical and emotional) and negative, oppressive social pressure during those formative years.
Not as many people develop (useful) social skills in school as you may think. It's a reason many, many people (in the US) have very negative experiences in high school and want to forget it.
I wasn't homeschooled, but I knew homeschooled kids growing up, and they all had friends and active social lives. Homeschooling doesn't have to mean you're locked away never interacting with anybody - in fact my homeschooled acquaintances had lots of friends who themselves were homeschooled, since their parents met through one of the various homeschooling support networks that exists in the UK.
Meanwhile I went to school like everyone else from the ages of 5 to 18 and I still came out at the end with the social intelligence of a potted plant. Sending your kids to school doesn't guarantee they'll turn out normal - if that was true then everybody would be normal.
I personally did sports. I didn't really like it when I was younger (10-13), but I got pretty good when I was a bit older. The flexibility of being homeschooled allowed me to pursue being an athlete more thoroughly through my teenage years whilst not missing out on academics. Luckily my parents had the financial means to let me pursue that (being an athlete on a national team is expensive af). It was probably the single best space for me developing into a relatively well adjusted adult.
I wasn't homeschooled before age 10 or so, so caveat emptor with younger kids.
Does your child actually need social interactions with kids his own age? The answer is pretty dependent on the individual. Some people need the social activity to play and stay motivated, but it mostly brought me misery and distraction. Adults can socialize kids too — there’s no speed limit. Prehistorically and for most of history kids grew up alongside their parents and a wide range of ages in peers, and followed their parents around as they worked.
The issue is that all the other kids of their age and of different ages will be at school. I'd say that the generalisation that kids need social interactions with kids their own age is true - an 8 y/o definitely shouldn't be interacting exclusively with people aged > 18 - although we drive that to an extreme with our rigidly age segregated schooling systems. Life around adults can be dreadfully serious and I think the innocent play of childhood amongst peers is generally crucial.
> The issue is that all the other kids of their age and of different ages will be at school.
This is definitely a big one. There are homeschool groups which provide enrichment during normal school hours. The biggest boon for socialising as a homeschooled kid though is after school classes of various kinds (sports, etc). They generally don't happen at school.
I'd say kids definitely need interactions with other kids. Homeschooling generally has wider bands than school grades in terms of age ranges, which can help kids learn to socialise with a variety of different age levels. On the other hand, I definitely knew a good number of homeschooled kids (myself included) who took a somewhat unhealthy level of pride in preferring the company of adults.
I was home schooled K-7 (skipped 8th grade). The flexibility was great and allowed me to start taking college level computer programming courses when I was 10 years old. I think I came out of it reasonably socially adjusted. I have two recommendations for anyone thinking about doing something similar:
1. Make sure your kids are involved in a decent amount of outside activities during the elementary school years that get them interacting with other kids. Things like team sports, music groups, etc.
2. Do NOT home school your kids through high school. I knew other kids who were and thought that they had socialization issues. You could easily argue that this point is mostly anecdotal and I couldn't really disagree, but I have a gut feeling that the high school years are particularly important when it comes to socialization.
Homeschooling takes 2-3 hours per day, not 8, and it doesn't have to be 5 days per week. Once the kids are around 10 or so, they can do a lot on their own as far as reading material.
For socializing, there's karate class, or other kid sports. Church groups, going to the local park. You know, getting out into the world.
If you're looking for advice, here are my top thoughts:
Your approach really depends on the age of the kid. I wasn't homeschooled until I was about 10, so my knowledge of how primary education works is much more limited.
You will definitely want to ensure there are after school activities your kid enjoys that they will be able to continue if you decide to homeschool them. It's important to not rip them out of all of their social circles.
See if there are any local homeschooling groups in your area. I assume you are in the US or Canada, where this is more widespread than in Europe. They will be able to advise you on what's good locally. I'd be careful to ensure that the groups are relatively well-aligned with your vision of what you and your kid want (it's often easier to find religious groups as they are usually more vocal, my assumption is that you are probably looking for a secular one). If you can't find a group that you like, seriously consider before deciding to go it completely alone.
Don't expect magic to happen overnight if you do decide to homeschool the kid. You mustn't push too hard, especially at first. It's a big change. The most important part is to help your kid learn how to learn as a self-driven person.
Give the kid agency. Let them choose what they learn (to a certain extent). You need to secure buy-in to the process. Without that you will just be fighting, and it will suck.
If you're both working full time in an office type job, it's not going to be easy. I did know one or two people who did this, but it's much more common for one or both parents to be either WFH and have a flexible job or for there to be a stay at home parent (sadly this is almost always the mother in my experience, it can be hard for stay at home dads to break into those circles).
If your kid is high school aged: think about how they might be able to go to university if they want to. Local community colleges often have programs that are suitable for dual-credit. I didn't do this but many of my friends did. Look into exams like the SAT/ACT/AP and how you can take them as an independent person. I was able to get into UK universities (I am originally British) with results in those American exams. Many of my friends used their community college credit to transfer into 4 year universities. Talk to other parents and their kids who did go to university about the route they took to get there.
The other fun benefit is that you'll have a much closer relationship with your kid than most other parents do, as you'll spend much more time with them.
I believe she met lots of moms and socialized her kids with activities with them. She also did all kinds of things with her youngest son. For example they were docents at the local aquarium for a few months.
Home-schooled kids are missing out on a lot even if you assume they are getting a good basic education and you're also somehow compensating for the social aspects.
Just to cite one example: music programs. Drama programs. The arts in general. Hard to substitute for these at home.
In addition, more widespread home-schooling serves the right-wing interests that are trying to tear down society in general, and to tear down the public school system in particular, in favor of religious indoctrination and elite schools for the rich. Those interests are dangerous and ascendant enough as it is. They don't need any more help right now.
I don't really agree with your first point. In my experience, most music, arts, and sports programs are in the form of after school activities that are open to all kids, and don't usually happen at school. Those sorts of things are a lifeline for homeschooled kids, as it's one of the best ways for them to still be around people their own age.
As far as your second point, I have definitely met a number of people as you describe, but they are significantly outnumbered (at least in my area) by perfectly well adjusted people whose kids just can't make it in school for whatever reason. Not every kid is capable of tolerating 8+ hours a day of institutionalisation, especially if they have some kind of medical issue.
I think the approach that local government takes with homeschoolers in my area (of the US) is too hands off: I never once met someone from my educational service district who might have checked that I was even alive and not just a tax cheat. However, I think that we should be careful not to restrict the ability of people to home-educate if they want to. Its an important backstop if they can't make the school system work for them, and trying to fit every edge case into the school system is a recipe for some seriously unhappy kids.
You actually think that's a useful point? It's not. Mozart's father was an extraordinary musician, and had support from royalty. Obviously, most kids, the vast majority, don't have that privilege. Furthermore, you're missing the social aspect.
What? The right-wing purpose of home-schooling is to get away from the religious indoctrination in public schools. And their support of school choice means elite schools for everybody, instead of just the rich, which is the status quo.
And at least in my school district, homeschoolers in the district could participate in extracurriculars like band and drama a la carte.
Elite schools for everybody? Hard to laugh hard enough at that. No. It doesn't mean that at all.
We were a lot better off when participation in the public schools was much higher. Draining resources from that system cripples it, and only a tiny minority can afford to send their kids to a quality school without it.
But our public schools are fine, except in places where they have a lot of violence (and private schools are not a factor). Education everywhere is throttled by students’ time and attention, not the quality of the schools.
“School choice” means vouchers, so that means everybody can afford to send their kids to a private school. That won’t make the kid any smarter, but they’re usually in a better school culture.
Their purpose is to get away from the political indoctrination in public schools. And honestly, considering how much of what's taught in school about our government and society just isn't true... I don't blame 'em.
(To be fair, a lot of them would probably try and get away from religious indoctrination if it weren't Christian.)
> And their support of school choice means elite schools for everybody, instead of just the rich, which is the status quo.
How do you figure that? The well-off are still the only people who will be able to afford the best education, because the reality is the amount of money you spend on education is highly correlated with the success of that education. The only thing it will do for the rest is take those with plenty of money out of the public school's tax base, decreasing the quality of education there even further.
You're right, I did (to an extent). Homeschooling isn't really scaleable. If you did try to, you'd probably invent something that very closely resembled a school.
However, my mother (who was much more heavily involved with my education) generally described her role as "less like a teacher, more like a principal". She certainly was in charge of the overall shape of the education, but a lot of the teaching happened in small group settings (effectively mutual tutoring) at the local homeschool group. Of course she did teach me lots of things in her area of expertise.
I’ve carried that lesson throughout my life. You can do a lot more, in a lot less time, when you’re in charge of your own time.