My kids are Generation Z, born between 1995 and 2010. And I wonder: what can we see in those kids now that can tell us what they'll be like later, at work?

As a history student in college (history of political thought, for all you fans of the Republic) and still an obsessive researcher of generational demographic trends (everyone should start with Strauss & Howe) I understand that to study history (contemporary or ancient), you must study generational shifts in thinking, because the way the generation thinks helps us to understand and explain historical action. And maybe predict future action.
So I think a lot about what Generation Z will be like. I have written before about what Generation Z will be like at work , but I've been thinking, recently, that the way Gen Z is educated will change the workplace when they enter it.
Baby boomers changed politics, Gen X changed family, Gen Y changed work, and Gen Z will change education. Here's how the education of Gen Z will affect us at work.
1. A huge wave of homeschooling will create a more self-directed workforce.
Homeschooling is going mainstream. We have known for a while that public education in the United States is largely terrible. Yes, there are pockets that are exceptional, but for the most part, we have an education crisis on our hands. But Baby Boomers were too scared to solve the crisis with homeschooling. If you homeschool your kids, you take them out of the typical ways to measure how well kids are doing in the competition. Baby Boomers couldn't handle that, and they also wanted to work full-time, so instead of homeschooling, Baby Boomers got kids tons of tutoring and extra help after school.
Gen X is more comfortable working outside the system than Baby Boomers. Gen X women are fine quitting their jobs to take care of their kids—they have no feminist ax to grind in the workplace. And Gen X parents don't feel a need to have their kid compete because Gen X is so noncompetitive. So homeschooling among Gen X parents is becoming mainstream. It's no longer just for religious radicals and problem children. Homeschooling is for parents who know public schools are broken and don't have $20,000 a year for private school.
This means we will have a generation of kids who grew up with largely a self-learning, self-directed model. They are more accustomed to figuring out what they like to do, and doing it on their own. The crisis to figure out what to do with one's life will not last so long because Gen X will raise more independent and self-directed kids.
2. Homeschooling as kids will become unschooling as adults.
We have established that school does not prepare people for work. In fact, Gen Y has been very vocal about this problem because a) they did everything they were told to do and it didn't help them get a job and b) we have a national crisis because gen y has huge debt from college and little ability to pay it back.
With alternative schooling and an emphasis on independent investigation, Generation Z will be the first group of knowledge workers who were trained to do their job before they started working. For example, Generation Z will be great at synthesizing information because they will have been doing that—rather than memorizing—the whole time they were in school.
The workplace ramification of this shift in learning is that Generation Z will have no problem directing their careers. They will know how to figure out what skill to learn next, and they will have more self-discipline to do it on their own.
When Gen Z enters the workforce, the older people, Gen X and Gen Y, will work to live, not live to work. This will be something Gen X and Gen Y fought hard for. To Gen Z it will be easy to do and self-learning will take center stage in their work day. So, as qualifications for the workplace will rapidly change and older people who don't keep up will be outdated, it will be Generation Z that is best at keeping up. Not because they are young, but because they understand that unschooling is not a movement for kids, but a way to live a life, and it doesn't stop when you start getting a paycheck.
3. The college degree will return to its bourgeois roots; entrepreneurship will rule.
The homeschooling movement will prepare Generation Y to skip college, and Gen X is out-of-the-box enough in their parenting to support that.
One of the books that really changed the way I think is Zac Bissonnette's book, Debt-Free U. He explains why no one should go into debt for college. It's just not worth it. He says, even if your parents have the money to pay for college, use it for something better—like buying yourself a franchise and learning something that'll really help you establish yourself in the adult world.
Baby Boomers are too competitive to risk pulling the college rug out from under their kids. And Gen Y are rule followers—if adults tell them to go to college, they will go. Gen X is very practical and is also the first generation in American history to have less money than their parents. So it makes sense that Gen X would be the generation to tell their kids to forget about college.
Ninety percent of Gen Y say they want to be entrepreneurs, but only a very small percent of them will ever launch a full-fledged business, because Generation Y are not really risk takers. However I am guessing (based on links like this one) that most members of Gen X have, at some point, worked for themselves. The entrepreneurship bug will be in full force when Gen Z comes along. They will feel they have no choice but to do that or weather an unstable workplace with huge college debt. People will trade in a college degree for on-the-job learning. The result will be a smarter workforce and the end of universities as a patronage system for philosophers.
Photo by Melissa Sconyers.




These are the kids that are born with broadband Internet access. Online communication will be in their nature from the start. It's clear for me that they'll change the way education happens to align it better with the evolution of technology. Let's hope they'll also revolutionize they way we teach in terms of psychology, not just technology
Posted by Eduard - People Skills Decoded on March 30, 2011 at 4:35 pm | permalink |
Very well written. I'm not sure which generation I am though. Definitely not Z, I'm too old for that. But either X or Y.
Posted by Margarita on March 30, 2011 at 4:36 pm | permalink |
I hear this argument often but I have a question.
Who would you want to repair your plane someone who recently graduated from university with a masters degree in engineering or a highschool dropout who has been repairing planes for years?
Posted by Bonadventure on July 12, 2011 at 7:32 am | permalink |
Good point, but most likely someone with a masters degree in engineering will not be repairing planes for a living. They may be training the people who repair the planes, but someone with a masters in engineering will not be on the tarmac fixing a mechanical problem.
Posted by SandyS on February 8, 2012 at 6:12 pm | permalink |
Sounds great, but where are we going to find engineers and scientists who need the advanced knowledge that university level learning confers?
You really want to trust yourself and others to an aerospace/chemical/civil/mechanical/electrical engineer learning as he/she goes?
You might find a "natural" engineer or "natural" research scientist here and there, but if you think there are more than in 1 in 100,000, you've been watching too many bad science fiction movies.
Posted by awiz8 on March 30, 2011 at 4:39 pm | permalink |
My dad was an engineer. He did it without a degree, without even finishing high school. He was very smart. He basically rose through the ranks of worker, technician and then engineer. The competency of and engineer is something that can be readily tested and certified, though it could also be done through apprenticeships.
Posted by Randy on March 30, 2011 at 6:03 pm | permalink |
So, do you think a company, like General Electric, that needs hundreds, if not thousands, of engineers NOW, is going to take the time to teach all the math, science, and engineering over a 4-6 year span, full time, to a horde of "apprentices", in order to get the engineers it needs?
You've got a far more optimistic outlook of the long view of today's senior corporate management than I do.
Posted by awiz8 on March 31, 2011 at 9:31 am | permalink |
Engineering licensure in all states but a few requires an ABET accredited 4 year degree. the fields today are too advanced to do what he did back then. There is also talk that a masters will be required for structural engineering.
Posted by chris on April 3, 2011 at 12:51 pm | permalink |
Um, no.
Each state and territory varies slightly, but in general, there is a four-step process required to obtain engineering licensure and become a professional engineer.
Step 1: Graduate from an ABET-accredited engineering program.
Step 2: Take the Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) exam which earns you the Engineering Intern (EI) or Engineer-in-Training (EIT) credential.
Step 3: Gain engineering work experience. Many jurisdictions have specific requirements about the type of experience you need to gain. Most require that you gain experience under the supervision of someone who is already a licensed engineer, and that your experience involve increasing levels of responsibility.
Step 4: Once you have gained the appropriate engineering experience, you can take the second exam in the licensure process, the Principles and Practice of Engineering (PE). This exam is given in a variety of engineering disciplines. Once you are granted licensure, you may use the distinguished designation "professional engineer," or P.E.
Posted by CaryAnn on April 3, 2011 at 1:43 pm | permalink |
But Penelope, I think you may be forgetting to include the impact of global economic shifts.
Posted by Lisa on March 30, 2011 at 4:41 pm | permalink |
This article is really interesting, but I can't help but feel there are certain racial (and therefore economical) demographics to consider. This article definitely struck me as middle class, and white. Homeschooling may be "the future" but it's also incredibly time consuming and expensive. If you're the working poor (or just plain living in poverty), you're probably working a minimum wage job for over 50 hours a week, and don't have the resources, time or possibly the education to really teach your kids anything.
Racism is not dead, and there are very little signs of it going away any time soon – and definitely not before "Gen Z" becomes college aged. And I think this is paramount to consider when discussing the fate of any particular generation – we're not all created equal, and racial influenced culture (ie: black culture) has a certain mindset that mainstream white america doesn't understand. So I'm hesitant to really agree that 90% of Gen Y wants to own their own business; what demographics are they looking at? Who are they talking to?
Not all of us have equal opportunity across boundaries of race, economic standing, sexual identity, physical ability and the list goes on.
Posted by Tatiana on March 30, 2011 at 4:48 pm | permalink |
I have written before about how diversity is about economics, not race. Here's the link:
http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2007/01/08/workplace-diversity-is-here-but-its-not-what-we-expected/
And it's very clear to me that poor kids would like to own their own business just as much as rich kids would. Poor kids are exposed to the same US culture that glorifies entrepreneurship that rich kids are — so how absurd to think that poor kids wouldn't want that as much as rich kids do.
Posted by Penelope Trunk on March 30, 2011 at 4:55 pm | permalink |
While I definitely appreciate you responding to my comment, I feel you've missed the point. My comment wasn't solely or specifically about how being poor would shape your RELATIONSHIP to an idea, but your ABILITY to achieve it. The public education system is bad because of the economic disparity that exists – typically between whites and not-whites. I'm sure there are tons of poorer blacks who want to own their own business, but as a culture, I don't really see a lot of emphasis on that. That's what my comment was about: how racial culture influences a individual (or an entire community's) perception about an idea. In white america, there are tons of icons and role models for starting one's own business, but not so in the black community. There's also – I have found – a lack of support system in terms of blacks helping other blacks. This is a problem in the community that white people don't necessarily have to deal with from my understanding and observations.
So what I'm talking about is the IMAGE. Homeschooling is expensive, but who are the people you see doing it? White people. Starting and owning one's own business has its trials and tribulations, but who are the people you see doing it? White people (for the most part).
The people who get the most voice, the most attention are white people. It's called white privilege for a reason. And while being black isn't a death sentence, race IS important whenever you bring up a discussion in regards to any and all things because race implies culture, which has a history and to ignore someone's race is like saying that what they went through as a people isn't important or not relevant to the discussion at hand. And while I'm sure there are plenty of blacks who are able or willing to start their own businesses, you can't ignore racial identity, and what being black in america actually entails.
Posted by Tatiana on March 30, 2011 at 9:33 pm | permalink |
I think Tatiana is making a broader point, if you look at countries that are patently _not white_ and are holding most of the economic bargaining chips right now. I pick two. India and China have huge regard for formal education – especially for maths and science which another commentator pointed out, although both nations are making huge creative strides in a Jeffersonian way, as the globalised generations grow up – as well as have their own models of entrepreneurial thinking and action, which are hard to understand from a distance, if you have never travelled to or lived in either of the two countries. Further, the state does nothing for you in terms of health and old age care, so people are forced to be "enterprising" in all spheres of their lives.
At least in India, which I see more often, as prosperity percolates down, more and more are seeking education and skills that give them a place in the global economy (a point another commentator has made).
And finally, I'd rather not be operated upon by a self-taught or home-schooled surgeon. Would you?
Posted by Shefaly on March 31, 2011 at 12:18 am | permalink |
I agree with you to some extent. I am not inured to my level of privilege. While my family does not make enough money to be considered "middle class" we are white and living in the suburbs of a major city which provides ample educational and cultural opportunities. I am married and do not have to work for us to make ends meet. Not everyone is in a situation where homeschooling is viable, nor is it possible for every parent to fund a startup business for a child coming of age.
However, the archetype Penelope is describing may well change the social landscape in this country enough that people of all races and classes will find themselves with new opportunities. Apprenticeships and mentoring may not become the norm any more than homeschooling is the norm now, but both are gradually becoming more widespread.
As a homeschooling mother, we discuss social issues in the context of our history studies constantly. We're not forced to plow through a textbook at a prescribed pace with 20 other kids, so we can have lengthy discussions. We're not stuck at a desk 6-8 hours a day, so we can participate in community service and local government as part of our studies. And I'm not forcing any of this on my kids; it's fueled by their own idealism and compassion, so they will likely carry the importance of activism and social equality with them into adulthood. Hopefully they will be forces for the kind of change this article envisions.
Posted by Rachele on April 1, 2011 at 12:23 pm | permalink |
I am a scientist, and while the university training that it requires will not go away, believe me it will change. It already is. There is an enormous shift happening now with how scientists are trained, and you do need to be able to adjust your skill set quickly.
Posted by April on March 30, 2011 at 4:50 pm | permalink |
I think she's also forgetting the rules of social interaction, which homeschooling kids often lack. After school activities don't make up for the regular involvement students learn from in the classroom, things like tolerance, cooperation, communication–all necessary in the real work world.
As my college kids say, you can spot a homeschooled kid suddenly exposed to the real world within minutes.
Posted by sophie on March 30, 2011 at 4:55 pm | permalink |
I think this really depends on what kind of parents you have doing the homeschooling. My nutritionist homeschooled her four kids, and raised them heavily involved in sports. Team sports.
Even if you don't have a triathlete nutritionist for a mother, there are community centers that are offering more and more activities for homeschooled kids in response to this trend. And then there's the internet, and I'm sure there must be homeschooler "meetups" of some sort in this day and age.
Having been educated at an English boarding school, however, the American system fascinates me. Take the use of multiple choice, for example. I think I did perhaps one multiple choice test in my entire high school career. Even in P.E. we wrote essays.
Posted by Harriet May on March 30, 2011 at 5:10 pm | permalink |
Actually the read socialization problem plaguing home educating families these days is having to turn down so many wonderful options so that we can et some school work done. You mention "things like tolerance, cooperation, communicationâall necessary in the real work world." Yes… they are necessary in the real world, which is where my kids live, taught by their parents, grandparents, elderly friends with whom they volunteer at the food bank, the myriad of kids they play sports with, the neighbors on the street, the kids they met at the state robotics competition, the college prof who taught my 8yo how to dissect frogs, the oncologist who gave an interview to my son about why liquid tumors can't be cured and so many others.
What is not particularly beneficial to social growth is to spend eight hours a day sitting in a room.
I think that many people still think that the majority of us home educators still run around with denim jumpers on and have a goat tied up in the back yard!
Posted by Heather on March 30, 2011 at 8:54 pm | permalink |
I think it's great that your kids spend time with so many people of varying ages. The thing about the current school system that seems most destructive to me is this business of kids spending all their time around kids of within a year of the same age. Real life is nothing like that. And I'll bet your kids don't get bullied, either! The public school system is remarkably like a penitentiary, and I'm glad to see people getting away from it.
Posted by Pirate Jo on March 31, 2011 at 4:17 pm | permalink |
*rolls eyes* You must be a boomer. My father says the same thing to me about Homeschooling. The argument seems to be a generational thing.
I've actually read about Homeschooling and connected with local resources. I actually know what is involved, firsthand. Do you?
Didn't think so.
M
Posted by NetWriterM on March 31, 2011 at 6:44 pm | permalink |
I have nephews and nieces who were homeschooled, and there IS a difference. The main one is that mommy got stuck with/chose to do the homeschooling. That means 1) daddy made enough money so mommy could stay at home 2) daddy was in a recession/lay-off adverse career or daddy worked incredible hours and constantly moved the family 3) mommy had better pray daddy didn't dump her.
My kids and other nieces/nephews grew up in homes where 1) mommy had a great paying job, 2) mommy and daddy took equal parts in their educations, 3) the family could pick and choose which fabulous public school to attend and 4) mommy never ever had to worry that if daddy died, or dumped her, that her standard of living would suffer.
Posted by EMM on April 2, 2011 at 6:41 pm | permalink |
Well said
Posted by TheShan on April 11, 2011 at 1:15 pm | permalink |
I find your response so interesting that you base your whole idea of what the 'typical' modern home school family looks like based on a few family members and their experience. I would strongly recommend that you immerse yourself into that lifestyle of many different families to see what that lifestyle is like. I am a home schooling mom that works outside the home and still takes the time to teach my children, because it is THAT important, or rather THEY (my children) are that important. Furthermore, I know other home school families that have BOTH parents working full time out of the home and BOTH parents teaching their children. Is this the norm? Well, not necessarily, BUT it is becoming more normal to see home school families from varying backgrounds, and functioning well in a nontraditional form. As for the lack of socialization… YOU.HAVE.GOT.TO.BE.KIDDING.ME!!! Get real, and get educated!
Posted by Christy on April 13, 2011 at 12:35 pm | permalink |
Isn't it interesting how people tend to fear what they don't understand? I'm talking about home schooling, in your case.
Posted by TheShan on April 11, 2011 at 1:14 pm | permalink |
The big (and false) assumption here is that education is about getting equipped for a job.
It's not. It's about learning and expanding who you are.
University education is about learning to think critically. This is vital for democracy, because citizens who vote need to be able to think critically. This wouldn't be a problem for an Aspie, since Aspies are hyper-logical. But for the rest of the population, becoming a logical thinker is hard, hard work.
The problem with home-schooling and un-schooling is that the kid is limited in what he/she's exposed to. The parent chooses the curriculum. If your parents are religious, you get religious indoctrination. If they're crunchy-granola-heads, you get the antiestablishment doctrine. Whatever – you don't get exposed to a wider range of thought. You're schooled in your parents' prejudices. So while homeschooling might prepare you for a job, it's not an education.
Sure, changes are coming to education (though public education in my country is *not* broken, and I find school today very exciting), just as they are to the workforce. We're going to need new models.
But if we talk about education as if it's only job-prep, then we lose something important. And we surrender our intelligence to the powerful who want to lead us around on a leash.
Posted by Nancy on March 30, 2011 at 5:01 pm | permalink |
Your comment sounds as narrow-minded as you accuse homeschoolers of being. I wonder if you actually know any homeschoolers.
Posted by Melanie on March 31, 2011 at 11:04 am | permalink |
Really? Do you think that public schools *don't* indoctrinate kids with a certain viewpoint and set of assumptions?
I know for a fact — as a homeschool parent in a large support group (about 200 families) — that homeschool kids get incredibly diverse educations, because each family is its own school district! They each choose their own curriculum, reading lists, extracurricular activities, etc. Each family has a unique set of opinions, both religious and political. There are hundreds of choices for homeschool programs; we don't use the standard "trade" textbooks which have had all the life sucked out of them and are politically correct to boot.
The lockstepping is found in the public schools.
Posted by aniwabe on March 31, 2011 at 10:37 pm | permalink |
I think it's true that this Generation won't be as likely to go to college because they feel like they have to, and their parents (the Gen X'ers) who have been screwed continually (name another generation that's suffered through three recessions before its members turned 50) will understand that getting a degree isn't the guarantee that it used to be. But they'll still send their kids to public school because they know that the relationship between time to home-school and ability to do it is almost always inversely proportional.
Posted by Wooden U. Lykteneau on March 30, 2011 at 5:11 pm | permalink |
I'm sorry I just laughed in my head and then out loud. lol
I'm a GenX "kid" who homeschools our GenZ kid. And I'm pretty typical: slow to commit (sorta) and slow to have kids, burned by many a recession, yes. Went to uni, got degree like a "good" kid should, which my parents didn't encourage me at all to do being the war babies they are, they were burned by the first big crash and then the Great Depression, and never recovered enough to aspire to sending 4 kids to college. So the government paid for part and I owe a heck of bill I can't pay. Typical GenX college experience. Ask around. And no way am I encouraging college after seeing that my child of 7 can read with none of the drilling in phonics I at first thought might be necessary.
It would be hard to find a more outgoing kid, who never meets a stranger, doesn't go nuts in public (or private), considers tons before making a decision but definitely insists on making his own, but not without collaborating first –and not just with his parents but with others too (kids and adults).
He's hardly dependent on his parents' worldviews. Even there, his mom thinks very differently from his dad. Usually dynamically opposing views. The thing is both his parents respect his decisions even when they can't agree, and they get to practice on each other a lot. So.
Still smiling about GenX not homeschooling their kids. Very funny. Oh and most of the homeschoolers I know are my age and younger. Sure are. lol
Posted by Katherine Anderson on April 15, 2011 at 12:03 pm | permalink |
As a proud Gen Xer, I happily disagree with you about Gen X not being competitive. It wasn't until Gen Y that "everyone who plays gets a trophy!" (and trust me, I'm saying that with as much mockery and sarcasm that I can muster). Thank God my competitive nature wasn't sucked out of me by ill-informed 'do gooders' that insist that it's just as good to lose a ball game as it is to win. Maybe Gen Z will be the ones to get rid of the World Series and Super Bowl.
Posted by Lauren Milligan on March 30, 2011 at 5:13 pm | permalink |
This might sound counterintuitive, but I think that the everyone-gets-a-trophy mentality is a cause of why we're so competitive. No one can handle the thought of losing anymore. Once we all caught on to that everyone getting a trophy trick, we escalated what was necessary to feel accomplished and valued. Gen Y is a generation that needs recognition, needs to feel special, and needs to know that if everyone else got a trophy too, well then I need a ribbon to stand out. Now as we've recently entered the workplace, Gen Xers (as frequently our managers) aren't quite sure how to handle this. It's not enough to do well and get a positive individual performance review. We're insecure, we want to know that doing well means doing BETTER than someone else, we're competitive! Rankings, benchmarks, easy access to data where you can compare your salary, responsibilities, accomplishments to your peers. We are competitive not with ourselves and our personal accomplishments, but in our need to see how we measure up against everyone else. I'd say that makes us very competitive.
Posted by Emily Van Metre on March 31, 2011 at 4:26 pm | permalink |
What's funny about the "everyone gets a trophy" comment is that it was really meaningless to me (I'm an early Gen-Y) when I was in those "everyone gets a trophy" situations.
We all knew the difference between a few people getting a trophy and everyone getting a trophy. Moreover, the "everyone gets a trophy" situations mostly occurred when we were fairly little (< 10 years old).
Posted by Dan Fay on April 6, 2011 at 9:14 pm | permalink |
Penelope,
I always take the time to read your postings, as they always bring a twist to the subject matter. Sometimes a completely new perspective.
My concern is how we slow learning humans will cope with the increasing pace of modern living – technology in particular. The real revolution is when not only a hand full of bright individuals are capable of inventing the future, but when vast numbers of active people become part of it.
To understand history, we should try to think like those who lived at that time. How do we train everybody to think about the present or even the future !?
Posted by Mikael B2B strategist on March 30, 2011 at 5:17 pm | permalink |
Technology itself is a great learning resource and apprenticing tool as well as the biggest encyclopedia ever. The revolution in the technology of gaming interfaces has sent the ability to simultaneously learn solo and with others into orbit, and I doubt that kind of learning can ever be replicated in schools this slow to reform.
So if you have someone who is slow to learn, sending them to school may keep them behind the 8 Ball.
Posted by Katherine Anderson on April 15, 2011 at 12:27 pm | permalink |
Great post, and a great topic. I have 4 kids that fall into this generation, and my take on how they might revolutionize school/work is with patience…because of the development (re-discovery?) of the family as their base. If Gen X's parenting is more hands on than Baby boomers, and if Gen Y is coming into education/workforce with the experience/expectation of split families, Gen Z might be different.
As a Gen X parent, we are not pushing our kids out the door, telling them to make it on their own. Instead we are encouraging our kids to let their lives develop and don't rush into educational commitments. Gen Z will look at educational options like no other generation: home school, charter school, Junior College, online degrees, with normalcy instead of exceptions. Because of that they won't be getting an education with the degree in mind but instead the outcome.
My hope is that they will be the first generation to force 'for profit' colleges (and, really isn't that all of them?) to be accountable for their product and price point.
Posted by Rich on March 30, 2011 at 5:25 pm | permalink |
"Generation Z will be the first group of knowledge workers who were trained to do their job before they started working."
We're called engineers, and we all have jobs.
Posted by Kris on March 30, 2011 at 6:18 pm | permalink |
I love this post, and I really hope you're right. The Gen Z kids are the children mainly of Gen X, right? I'm Gen Y and I worry about my ability to homeschool my kids because of economics. It seems like most households nowadays need two incomes just to afford a middle class life, especially with extras like education debt, etc. I hope Gen Yers are able to homeschool their kids too. I think it's time parents take more personal responsibility in their children'ss education.
BTW Penelope, do you homeschool or kids, or do private school?
Posted by Tiffany S. on March 30, 2011 at 6:35 pm | permalink |
"Generation Z will be the first group of knowledge workers who were trained to do their job before they started working. For example, Generation Z will be great at synthesizing information because they will have been doing that…the whole time they were in school."
There is an interesting discussion in this observation. This seems to presume that the ability to synthesize information is independent from technology platforms. However in 10-20 years time technology platforms will be able to filter, adapt and recompose information in ways that are customised for each specific individual's needs and preferences. Which begs the question, will Generation Z be better at synthesizing information or will they just be better at interacting with systems that perform the task for them?
A good analogy relates to use of GPS systems. Studies have shown that people who consistently rely upon GPS for navigation tend to experience a decrease in geospatial abilities. Susan Greenfield from Oxford tends to be a bit alarmist but she has some interesting ideas on the subject. http://bit.ly/fnz23w
PS: Have you thought about switching comments over to Disqus or IntenseDebate?
Posted by Steve Gotz on March 30, 2011 at 6:50 pm | permalink |
Oh, wow. This is a really interesting comment, Steve. I had not thought of this aspect of information processing. Like, maybe we've peaked, right now.
And, if I had Disqus then I'd vote your comment up top. So, I think I'm going to send an email to my tech guy right now to ask him to move comments to Disqus.
Penelope
Posted by Penelope Trunk on March 30, 2011 at 10:24 pm | permalink |
I think the idea that people who use a technology become dependent on that technology is true. (Many not all) children who learn to read early tend not to remember things as well as children who learn to read late and must remember things in sequence, in context, complete with intonation, body language, and other images to go with events, etc.
For instance, actors don't interpret scripts well if they continue to stick to scripts after the first read-throughs, and they know that! An adept actor presses to master other skills and to know their part through multiple filters. Some of these use reading, listening, watching, psychoanalyzing (audience as well as one's part and other parts), mirroring, mimicking, and stretching the part in as many ways as possible.
And the use of many filters is only made more possible with technology. Have you used the GPS for other than its intended use? You probably have without noticing! If so, you might see that the GPS is not as limiting as you think it is. Writing off the little things you notice curtails learning from things that haven't been pointed out by something or someone else.
The technology is not doing the learning. And the learning is in noticing and making connections. Someone who wants to direct their own learning could start with the assumption that the learner is doing the learning, not the technology.
The GPS does not, by itself, truncate learning anymore than reading does. However by only emphasizing the intended use of reading (to educate/communicate), the GPS (to navigate on the roads, etc) and other technologies … of course we can truncate learning by relying on these things to play a clearly defined role and only that role!
Remember the first rule of statistics: correlation does not mean cause.
Posted by Katherine Anderson on April 15, 2011 at 1:03 pm | permalink |
I'm a baby boomer, and I homeschooled all 6 of my kids (now 18-29) right through high school. Who do you think STARTED the homeschool revolution? Terrified? Nah, exhilarated to have found an alternative.
Posted by Madeleine Todd on March 30, 2011 at 7:25 pm | permalink |
I have an amazing little brother who is Gen Z and it was very exciting to read this article about his up and coming generation.
Having said that, I'll be blunt and say I was alarmed to find out that homeschooling is on the rise. As a child of Babyboomer parents and a Gen Yer I think there are a few points missing here in your post and in the comments.
Although this has been slightly touched upon, I think something we're forgetting is that public/private schools socialize kids, which given that something like a whopping %80 of people get jobs through networking is an important point to make. Unless Gen Z radically changes this practice, being home schooled could be very detrimental to them. I know parents enroll their kids in team sports and other activities but from my experience it's simply not enough. What my parents did was enrolled all of us kids (my fellow Gen Y sister and Gen Z brother) in public school and took the time outside of school to work with us when we were having problems in a subject, be it reading, math, etc…
Another point I'd like to hit upon is the fact that to even be considered for most jobs now days you have to have a bachelors degree (or relevant experience) which is why I don't think it will be possible for Gen Z kids to even get hands on training. I've been trying to break into a new career without going back to school and it's been pretty close to impossible (side note- I have a bachelors degree). Also consider that when Gen Z enters the workforce, Gen X and Y will be the head honchos making the hiring decisions, so it will have to be Gen X & Y making some radical changes to their hiring practices (which is possible).
My degree, admittedly hasn't gotten me far and I often wonder what would have happened had I waited a few years after high school to really think about what I wanted to be when I grew up… So I dearly hope Gen Z takes time before spending the money on an education they may or may not use.
All in all, great post. I'm excited to see what Gen Z's will do.
Thank you!
Posted by Amanda on March 30, 2011 at 7:30 pm | permalink |
I disagree that homeschoolers don't get socialized as well as those in schools. In my experience, homeschoolers tend to socialize with many age groups rather than with one specific age group so that their network is much more diversified and that diverse network is, as far as I can tell, better able to move the young person into a job than a network that is composed primarily of same-age peers.
Posted by Randy on March 30, 2011 at 8:08 pm | permalink |
Randy, you are so right. The socialization issue is the most tired homeshooling stereotype in the book.
Posted by Heather on March 30, 2011 at 8:20 pm | permalink |
The only socialization I learned in middle school was how to pick on the less-popular kids.
Posted by Mark on March 31, 2011 at 1:32 pm | permalink |
I think Penelope should put a note that anyone who brings up the tired trope of poor socialization in homeschooling will have to do some kind of penance.
Seriously ridiculous.
M
Posted by NetWriterM on March 31, 2011 at 6:48 pm | permalink |
"Home
schooling myth no. 1: Socialization. 'But will your children fit
in??!!' We hope not. Followers fit in, leaders stand out. 'But what
about time with kids their own age?' What about time with all ages? And
you were once a child — what did you learn that was so great, from kids
your own age? Usually when a kid shoplifts, or sneaks his first smoke,
or vandalizes somebody's property, he's not with his grandmother at the
time." — Rick Boyer
Posted by Debbie on October 17, 2011 at 2:00 pm | permalink |
"Home
schooling myth no. 1: Socialization. 'But will your children fit
in??!!' We hope not. Followers fit in, leaders stand out. 'But what
about time with kids their own age?' What about time with all ages? And
you were once a child — what did you learn that was so great, from kids
your own age? Usually when a kid shoplifts, or sneaks his first smoke,
or vandalizes somebody's property, he's not with his grandmother at the
time." — Rick Boyer
Posted by Debbie on October 17, 2011 at 2:00 pm | permalink |
Good article, but I can't help feeling like it only addressed two-parent (and one high income), homeschooled kids – my daughter is going to public school, I work (not to forge ahead in the feminist movement, to pay for our life), and even if I wanted to, I don't have time or funds to do the homeschooling.
I'd like to think that all of the above is possible for ANY kid coming out of this generation, and not just kids who receive one certain type of education or have one certain type of family.
Posted by Sal's Mom on March 30, 2011 at 7:46 pm | permalink |
Well, my kids go to public school too. But I still feel that they have an alternative education. I take them out of school for music lessons, I help them raise animals on the farm, and they each have small businesses to earn money instead of an allowance. It's not homeschooling, but these are examples of me making sure they have the sort of alternative education I think they will need to become adults in their world. The reason I wrote this piece is so we could start having a discussion about alternative ways of learning/schooling. I don't think any of us is so limited that we cannot be part of the discussion.
Penelope
Posted by Penelope Trunk on March 30, 2011 at 8:13 pm | permalink |
Hey PT – Would love to hear more about the businesses your kids run instead of an allowance. Can you do a post on that?
Posted by Melissa Breau on March 31, 2011 at 12:26 pm | permalink |
My mother did this, too. She took us out of school to go to plays, or hear important speakers, or travel to different places around the world (my dad was involved in that, too). When we weren't in school, she planned history-themed family vacations, took us and the neighbor kids to see Congress in session and meet our representatives, etc. She always made it clear that school was important, but not the only way to learn.
This is why I like to say that I was public-schooled and home-schooled.
Posted by KateNonymous on April 1, 2011 at 4:53 pm | permalink |
My male grandparents got to go through sixth grade, my parents through eleventh grade (which was all public school had then) and I missed Baby Boom by two years (early) and graduated from college (philosophy) and went to professional school in theology training for Christian ministry, then worked my career in computers, trained on the job and learned to do what was required, trained or not. I look forward positively to my grandchild Gen Z and life ahead.
Posted by Bob Braxton on March 30, 2011 at 8:33 pm | permalink |
Not convinced. Too many biases here (as mentioned, white, middle class etc) but also ethnocentric. It's a big world out there beyond America's borders. Not every culture views homeschooling as such a viable option as (apparently) lots of Americans do. And not every education system is 'broken', or distrusted – in many places quite the opposite.
Posted by Cathy0 on March 30, 2011 at 9:23 pm | permalink |
As a psychologist and Gen Xer who is home educating six children, I wholeheartedly agree with your predictions! I am dismayed by the ignorance and prejudice in regards to homeschooling evidenced by some of your commenters, however.
It's a myth that homeschoolers don't have social skills, unless you're talking about being socialized the way most public school teens are. Most homeschoolers are woefully inadequate when it comes to drinking, drugging, and sleeping their way through their high school education. Of course, they also haven't learned how to have no regard for their education or the adults who to try to give them one. And when it comes to continuing to exhibit these social skills in college, I'm willing to bet they won't. Tsk, tsk.
As far as homeschoolers not being educated, you can't mean test scores as they test four grade levels ahead of public school students. And of course you can't mean that they can't compete, as they tend to dominate every kind of academic competition. So you must mean that they aren't indoctrinated to be unquestioning minions of the state. No, they just aren't educated that way. What a pity that they aren't taught what to think, but how.
Posted by Mel on March 30, 2011 at 9:29 pm | permalink |
As a teacher, I've found that in the public schools I teach there is about a 5-10 year lag when it comes to consumer tech v. technoloogy in education. It is always a pleasure to teach kids with the latest technology, but there are inevitable frustrations caused by board policys, internet filters, etc. It is my hope that Gen Z takes a more open minded approach to technology, and that they take advantage of the few teachers who try to teach with technology while they can.
Posted by DJBKT on March 30, 2011 at 9:31 pm | permalink |
Homeschooling is NOT expensive and it's not exclusive to whites. The latest research suggests that the amount of money homeschooling parents spend to educate their children makes no appreciable difference in achievement. This isn't surprising as despite the billions we have spent on public education, we haven't realized a return on our investment. Please educate yourself about homeschooling before you make silly comments like "homeschooling is expensive." It isn't.
Posted by Mel on March 30, 2011 at 9:38 pm | permalink |
I presume the cost mentioned above is not the cost of supplies, but the opportunity cost of one parent forgoing paid work. It is very difficult for many families to afford housing on one salary.
Posted by Erin McJ on March 30, 2011 at 10:22 pm | permalink |
It's very challenging for many families to live on one income. Not everyone can do it, but many are willing to make the sacrifice. Many homeschooling families start family businesses or adjust their work schedules to maintain an adequate income. Loss of income notwithstanding, homeschooling is the least expensive and most cost-effective education there is.
Posted by Mel on March 30, 2011 at 10:41 pm | permalink |
"because the way the generation thinks helps us to understand and explain historical action. And maybe predict future action."
This could not be more true, I'm looking for a Tun Tsu quote to match the sentiment, but can not think of it right now. Great post.
Posted by Greg Netland on March 30, 2011 at 10:01 pm | permalink |
This is one of your most brilliant articles. We can't be sure what the format will be for sure – probably some form of integrated learning experiences. But one thing is sure we will not be teaching through memorization and that is fantastic. We need innovative problem solvers who collaborate quickly and meaningfully to get answers. More than likely – the kids are way ahead of us and will have it all figured out by the time they reach 18.
Posted by Randi Sandlin on March 30, 2011 at 10:04 pm | permalink |
I'm on the edge of the Baby boom, so I'm very competitive, and value college, however I've seen how much of my career has not taken off, so I'm back getting a tech certificate because my BA and MA did not land the salary needed for retirement. I am one of those who have 2 gen z kids. Both have IEP's so I know the education system is broken, that every day kids with labels under IDEA are not getting a FAPE, so no one can really claim with absolute certainty that the education system is not broken. I have to be one of those tough Baby Boomers who are sick and tired of the establishment hurting kids and neglecting those who cannot afford private school or have the single moms who can't afford to home school. So, I'm the Boomer who wants to go to law school and effect some policy change.. I know a dreamer, but someone's gotta say and and do it. Denial of FAPE is everywhere. The parents with the perfect world who's children fit in just right have NO idea what is going on. Children in Georgia have been killed in their GNET schools, have come home w/ bruises and had been locked in rooms. Children with Autism get put in the GNETs because Georgia schools do not understand sensory issues or how to work with Autism. Most parents could not afford Due Process. That is reality. Hopefully gen z will rise above it.
Posted by Libby McCullough on March 30, 2011 at 11:01 pm | permalink |
Thank you for any work you do with advocating for kids with special needs. As a parent of a child on the autism spectrum, I find your comments about Georgia schools extremely disturbing. And it makes me even more thankful for the work our schools in Minnesota do, though it is getting increasingly difficult to do it because of massive cuts to education every year.
BTW, just for the sake of commenting in general–I am a Gen X'er married to a Boomer raising two Gen Z'ers. DS14 is on the autism spectrum, more of an Aspie with extremely high intelligence and very low social skills. He goes to the nearby public middle school in the mornings and comes home before lunch to unschool/homeschool (his only home curriculum is Algebra, currently). DD12 is in a nearby private school that is excellent for her both academically and socially. We have done all of the possibilities I can think of: homeschool/unschool, public schools, and now private school, and even a combination of two at a time. I am making it work for us.
My husband is a 20-year public school teacher, and yes as a Boomer he probably got into his field when the education system and jobs with tenure, pension and benefits were at their peak in the U.S. (We now have to worry dearly about that pension, however, not to mention job security since he is a music teacher and that may someday not be considered a "basic".)
I have chosen and been able to stay home with my kids by living a very simple life. We are not too far above the level where we would qualify for many forms of government assistance, but we make it work. We choose to live in a small city where housing is basically affordable, and we make many choices (which would be considered sacrifices to those who really care about living the standard American lifestyle) so that we can live on one income. We're focused on making a life more than a living. I know this is not or desirable for everyone, but it is surely possible for more people than those who choose it.
Posted by Lisa Z on April 4, 2011 at 7:18 pm | permalink |
Very interesting article, and as many of your articles about college and education it views a college and university education not as something to be desirerd but as something which stops you to become what you want to become. Yes, it is possibke nowadays to acquire a lot of information from books, internet and many wonderful resources, which are available. Depending on your goals in life, this can be the perfect path to take. Just stop a moment and consider that many people do not want to become entrepreneurs, own their own business or want to spend their life organizing and selling. Many want to pursue a different path, become engineers, scientists, mathematicians, technicians, nurses or doctors. All these professions require the student to learn, sit down and spend hours and days to graps new concepts and learn many things where he/she does not immediately see the
benefit. And a broad knowledge base required for all these professions is not acquired by self-guided study through online resources, or by learning through experience and hands-on examples. A good teacher/professor is an incredible resource to advance human knowledge, don't dismiss this so easily.
Posted by Petra on March 30, 2011 at 11:04 pm | permalink |
That's what I thought my education was going to be. I thought I would learn how to be a psychologist from real teachers. In fact, I learned very little over the course of 9 years of college and graduate school from my professors. Most of my grad school profs were interested in using their grad students as slave labor so they could get more research published, not in teaching. I learned everything valuable from practicing and studying on my own. Most education is self-education.
Posted by Mel on March 30, 2011 at 11:22 pm | permalink |
What I meant was I am a dreamer. "We are the music makers, we are the dreamers of dreams." Wonka.. but seriously, I'm ready to do something also. Unless we get rid of the unions that are choking out education, and keep filing complaints, nothing is going to change. Competition would also work. They don't have enough competition, and they only allow you to sue when they want you to be able to do so.
Posted by Libby McCullough on March 30, 2011 at 11:08 pm | permalink |
yes, indeed there are poor teachers out there, unfortunately. But a good teacher will not take away the work everybody needs to do in reading and thinking, and learning how to acquire knowledge. However, teachers and professors inspire and provide a framework which allows the student to learn. It is not a teachers responsibility to feed the pupil every scrap of knowledge, if you leave school, college, university and know how to learn and put what you learned into perspective your education was quite successful. I agree, there are bad examples out there, but this does not mean that a college or university education is useless. It all depends on what you want to do: if you want to build bridges learning your profession as a civil engineer is highly recommended, and learning on the job is not going to give you the required expertise. And in many professions and jobs emotional intelligence is critical and of prime importance, for example, to lead a group successfully and interact well.This is not the case in technical professions where technical expertise should be more important to success in the workplace. Just wanted to throw in a few thoughts from the side of sience and engineering to stress that many of the general statements made here are situation dependent.
Posted by Petra on March 30, 2011 at 11:43 pm | permalink |
Thanks for the reads, but I'm going to unsubscribe. Why this post, when I didn't do it all the other times? I'm just really tired of you making generalizations. You like labels and boxes for people and behaviors. Life isn't that simple. You think every single study that shows a 51% lean means it's always true. You think every statement applies to everyone. Not for me, no more generalizations, no more nice neat little labels, x is this, y is this. I prefer to treat people like the individuals that they are. Goodbye, best of luck to you.
Posted by Kate on March 31, 2011 at 2:15 am | permalink |
So true, can't agree more.
Posted by Jay on March 31, 2011 at 3:54 am | permalink |
Good subject; demo-centric treatment.
Homeschooling implies educated parents, and having access to a support system; don't you think?
Have you been to a working class neighborhood? People that are working to survive, to put food on the table, not for 'self-actualization' or whatever the term is.
India, Brazil, and China will eat our lunch. And all of your gen z kids (I'm not having children, thankyouverymuch) will be working as peasants for a non-white conglomerate.
PS – Nice picture, by the way.
Posted by emily on March 31, 2011 at 6:52 am | permalink |
I feel for he kids that are born from 2011+ when we have run out of letters and don't know what to call them anymore. I wonder if we'll have to stop categorizing.
Posted by davednh on March 31, 2011 at 8:06 am | permalink |
I think all the generations will revolutionize the education system in one way or another. It's happening in the formative years of learning for Gen Z; the parents, teachers, and others charged with teaching Gen Z, and each and everybody else that either needs to go back to school or stay current in a given field.
Economics and global competition will make it necessary. I see many people here in the comment section taking sides for either formal schooling (public or private) or homeschooling. I think either one or a combination of both is acceptable. However, I also think it's important for a student to be tested on a regular basis and demonstrate necessary skills.
Posted by Mark W. on March 31, 2011 at 9:37 am | permalink |
I am still digesting this after reading it twice. Frustrated, amazed, and as a parent of 6 little freaked out.
Aside from that, I am drawn to this post and want more information. Going to read it again and explore all the links…
Damn you Penelope.
Nathan
Posted by Nathan Fultz on March 31, 2011 at 10:17 am | permalink |
Well….I homeshcooled my kids for all and more of the reasons you outlined and NOT for either religious or as my kids used to call the uber-hippies "homey-schoolers".
Even though we were in a fringe kinda thing, we didn't really fit in with any of them, we didn't follow a curriculum, it was purely child led. They became proficient at the library, research and drilling down on a subject.
I saw the school system even then as not much more than a holding tank, with little to no creativity or fostering learning for the love of it. PLEASE don't get even get me started on the lack of the "arts"; music and all the arts were non-negotiable and as important as the 3 R's for us.
As for university, they've all done it differently and to various degrees. For some things our higher educational system is fabulous and there's no replacing it, we're blessed to have it as a choice.
My kids are now finally understanding and able to express how much they appreciated the choices we made. Many times it was tough for them, particularly when the most common questions asked where "what grade you're in" or "where do you go to school" or "why aren't you in school today?"
I don't usually comment on posts, but this was tailor made for our family's experience ~ my kids are already on the other side of this new type of education.
Thanks for explaining in black and white what we did! I'm sending this link to my kids (They're 30, 26 and 24) and as you've said, they're all extremely independent, confident and most definitely working for the love of what they do.
BTW ~ the picture of you're little one all dressed up could have been pulled out of our photo album …kindred spirits….Brought a huge smile and fond memory to my heart.
PS I had a very upwardly mobile professional career & I have absolutely no regrets on the choice I made.
Posted by Jeri on March 31, 2011 at 10:37 am | permalink |
Penelope- In the first sentence of the 3rd section, you say "the homeschooling movement will prepare Generation Y to skip college"– I believe you mean Generation X. Just letting you know so others won't be confused.
Very interesting post!
Posted by Sam on March 31, 2011 at 11:53 am | permalink |
I'm pretty sure Gen X is all out of college and working already.
Posted by Bill on March 31, 2011 at 1:58 pm | permalink |
I think we're already seeing 3 in the UK. With high tuition fees, high student debt, and fewer paid grad-level jobs (due in part to the scourge of unpaid internships) many are questioning whether a degree is worth the debt.
Posted by Clare on March 31, 2011 at 12:45 pm | permalink |
I home-schooled 4 of my 5 kids, limited to primary grades.
I agree with the respondent who said that getting a job is NOT the end-game. Having a "liberal education" is the end-game, to me. Communications skills. Critical thinking. Problem-solving. Aesthetic response. Global responsibility. Ethical decision-making. Computational skills. The drive to look-it-up or google it, which leads to a questioning, then researching EVERYTHING.
In classical thought, logic would be added to the above list of liberal education topics. Maybe "analysis" is the new name for logic?
Alverno College and UW-Madison have a long history of education for the above-mentioned competencies. I myself have 2 degrees from Alverno. And a Masters which did not advance my career.
I agree that you need motivated, confident and well-educated parents to home-school their children effectively. The qualifying events for those parents come from a dedication to being a life-long learner. Again, speaking of Wisconsin (and next-door in Minnesota), we have a superb public radio program that is/was partly state-funded, which can turn you into a life-long learner or fulfill your sense of curiosity, which is a pre-requisite to EVERYTHING were are discussing here.
Honoring and fostering kids curiosity leads to thinking outside the box, creativity and innovation later on (when you are ready for the job market).
Sports and athleticism is everywhere these days–it wasn't so a few years back. Sports need not be associated with school.
But I think athleticism contributes to a well-rounded individual. Without it, you may be entirely in your head. With some athletic training, you move between your head and the rest of yourself, literally putting thoughts into action.
Lastly, some kind of spiritual or ethical orientation which has to be fostered–it isn't automatic. Altruism/ethics/spirituality is an important element of being a whole person . . .
Posted by chris Keller on March 31, 2011 at 1:38 pm | permalink |
Here's why I think getting a job is the end game. Because if you teach a kid to read Plato and do math but the kid can't get a job then their self-esteem will be killed. People want to contribute to society as adults, and in that way, each of us has a job. The job can be raising kids, the job can be building a house, it can be anything, but we each want to contribute to the community in a way that we feel the community values us. It's part of the inherently social nature of being human.
So the idea that we only have to teach people to think is a cop-out to me. We also have to teach people how to find their passions, work in groups, know how to steer themselves.
Asperger Syndrome is a disability because it is not enough to be a genius. It is important to be able to be useful and participate in projects greater than yourself. I think the end game is to find a job for yourself where you contribute to the community and the community values you.
Penelope
Posted by Penelope Trunk on April 1, 2011 at 11:30 am | permalink |
This is why I feel so much sympathy for Generation Y right now. They spend a fortune on college, only to step out into a world that says, "We don't need you." It's even worse now than it was in 1992 when I got out of college. Not being able to find a job makes a person feel like a surplus human.
Posted by Pirate Jo on April 1, 2011 at 1:34 pm | permalink |
Wow, I disagree strongly with the notion that people are driven nowadays to find their value as a person in their contribution to society or, for that matter, much of anything larger than themselves. In my brief time as a high school teacher, my biggest and saddest shock was realizing just how little any of my 15-16 year old charges thought or cared about anyone other than themselves. Their friendships were largely shallow and they did not embrace any concept of "community" that wouldn't more accurately be called tribalism. And when I thought about these self-centered, unempathetic kids, I realized, hey, this is what we're teaching them. Our entire society is retreating from the concept of nation, community, neighborhood into family and tribe. If people do even identify with strangers, it is only in the most superficial ways and rarely translates into any sense of shared sacrifice or any concept of helping one another.
So no, I don't think people are seeking to find value in themselves by contributing to the community. They are looking to enrich and aggrandize themselves as much as possible with as little effort as possible. I agree that failing to earn a living kills self-esteem, but it's sure not because people feel they've let society down.
Posted by RandyS on April 3, 2011 at 6:14 pm | permalink |
I am a babyboomer/x/y/z…I have given my kids tons of tutoring, homeschooled, and would rather invest money for them than pay for college. Do I have generational identity confusion? Oh, and I have worked for myself since graduating college, learning more outside of college than inside…go figure? (ahhh, but it was SO much cheaper/more affordable then…)
Lastly – homeschool socialization question: when the ratio of children to adults is 1 adult to under 5 kids, kids model adult behavior…when over 5 kids, (i.e. in class of 20 – 30) kids model peer behavior…ponder the difference between "being socialized" i.e. the small group and "socializing" via the large group and basically what we do at parties…
love the article…
Posted by Suzanne on March 31, 2011 at 3:08 pm | permalink |
I honestly don't think homeschooling could ever totally replace going to a public or private school. Sadly there are those parents (rich and poor) who like the fact that their kids are gone. They don't care what they're learning or not learning, just that they're out of their hair for those hours during the week. Also as stated above, to have effective homeschooling you need parents who are educated and dedicated. What about parents who went through a bad school system themselves and don't have much of an education? What if the parents (or sometimes just parent as in single parent) who didn't even finish high school? Are they going to be able to effectively educate their children? Even an educated single parent is short on the time needed to homeschool. Sometimes the "bad" public schools get that way because of a lack of parental involvement. Plus the kids at some of these schools are dealing with more issues at age 9 than I've had deal with as a 31 year old. I still see a need for public schools, but yes the system will have to be overhauled to be more effective. Perhaps allowing more of the freedoms of homeschooling and self directedness into public schools, but that won't happen until the emphasis is off of standardized testing. I think basing everything on standardized tests is one of the biggest problems of public schools. They're too scared to deviate from what's on those tests so they just drill on those subjects neglecting others. It would be nice of everyone could afford a great private school or have the luxury of time, education, and money to be able to take time off to homeschool effectively, but that's simply not the case for everyone. Will private and homeschooling become luxuries the wealthy can afford (thus giving an edge to the children of more affluent homes) with public education becoming a babysitter/holding cell for the children from poorer families? This also has an effect on how higher education is viewed within the family? Is it a key to a better life? Less so as we've seen these days, but often without it difficult to get a foot in the door of higher paying careers. This brings up lots of questions, but also like the dialogue it presents to get people thinking about how we view education-at least in this country.
Posted by J. E. on March 31, 2011 at 3:33 pm | permalink |
I tend to agree with what you've written, J.E.
We are unschoolers. My wife is able to stay at home and wants to do this. She has a Phd and 2 masters degrees. There is a huge financial cost to keeping my wife off the labor market for the years of schooling. But, what the hell, there's a huge cost to having kids at all, and I don't expect to make a profit on them. That said, I do agree that homeschooling will not and should not end public education or private schools.
We know families who don't feel competent to do any sort of education at home. We also know parents who have identities staked firmly in their careers and they are not interested in homeschooling.
And one of my own main misgivings about public schools, at least at the k-12 level, is that teachers are having to teach kids to standards. This seems to me to be an attempt to mould the standard kid into some sort of standard industrial widget of the type that can be easily replaced with some other widget. I know teachers who have bailed out of education because it not only dehumanizes kids, it dehumanizes teachers.
So, I don't think the problem is really so much a few bad public schools or a few bad teachers. I think there are problems with the central values of our educational systems and a complete overhaul would be helpful.
Posted by Randy on March 31, 2011 at 4:27 pm | permalink |
I must disagree with in on your statement of parents needing to be educated in order to instruct their children. Neither my husband, nor I have much education above a high school education, yet we feel completely confident in being able to fully teach our children through high school. We both have the determination, common sense and brains to know how and where to look for information to pass along to our children and also teach them how to find information and use discernment in the authenticity of that information. Recently (maybe in the last 2 years) there was a study published that showed that there was no outcome difference of significance between home school parents with advanced degrees and home school parents with a GED in the successfulness of their home schooled children.
Posted by Christy on April 13, 2011 at 1:15 pm | permalink |
Excellent synopsis "Baby boomers changed politics, Gen X changed family, Gen Y changed work, and Gen Z will change education." When you look back…each generation has made tremendous contributions. Our education system could benefit so much by change. Rock on Generation Z!
Posted by Terri on March 31, 2011 at 3:37 pm | permalink |
I want to see how home-schooling parents are going to teach Mandarin to their kids. With a Rosetta Stone?
Posted by Ina on March 31, 2011 at 6:43 pm | permalink |
The same way you do when you decide to start learning Mandarin.
Posted by Andini Rizky on April 1, 2011 at 9:01 am | permalink |
This cracks me up. My 7 yr old is doing exactly that. Well, along with books, children's videos in Mandarin, etc.
Posted by Rachele on April 1, 2011 at 11:35 am | permalink |
Can any of the home-school advocates point us towards something other than their opinions and anecdotal evidence to support their claims? You know… academic, peer-reviewed research that's been published and can be found in more than one library?
Posted by Wooden U. Lykteneau on April 1, 2011 at 6:40 am | permalink |
Here's a link that has a number of studies on a number of topics related to homeschooling.
http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000010/200410250.asp
Posted by Randy on April 1, 2011 at 7:33 am | permalink |
What part of "peer-reviewed" did you not understand?
Posted by Wooden U. Lykteneau on April 1, 2011 at 9:14 am | permalink |
This kind of response is exactly why I didn't waste my time posting a link to a number of what you would consider "peer-reviewed" journals (aka public education journals). You aren't truly interested; you just want to put homeschooling and its advocates down. If you're really interested in the research, you'll look it up yourself. Are you familiar with Google?
Posted by Mel on April 1, 2011 at 9:42 am | permalink |
I didn't invent the term nor its standards — it's called social science — and I elicited precisely the response I expected, which is that you're not willing to discuss the research that either won't support your position, or will demonstrate the self-selection bias that severely skews these results. Advocate all you like, but don't pretend you're not biased or that you don't have an axe to grind because "the system" is set up against you.
Posted by Wooden U. Lykteneau on April 1, 2011 at 10:04 am | permalink |
Ah, you must mean the social sciences that I have a Ph. D. In and the journals I have published in. Fortunately, there's no selection bias or axes to grind there. What's scary is that you really believe that. Actually, I didn't say I wasn't willing to discuss the research. I said I wasn't willing to link you to the studies so you could say they were biased or flawed if favorable toward homeschooling or right on if they weren't favorable. Speaking of bias and axes to grind. I honestly haven't read any studies that suggested homeschooling wasn't effective. Please post them here if you find them so I can criticize their method, sampling and analyses.
Posted by Mel on April 1, 2011 at 10:43 am | permalink |
http://www.nheri.org has bibliographies available full of research as well as general information, some of the studies are peer-reviewed.
Posted by Rachele on April 1, 2011 at 11:54 am | permalink |
The comments of this post are more interesting than the actual post. Lots of great information and snarky remarks. Keep it up!
Posted by Tiffany S. on April 1, 2011 at 10:43 am | permalink |
I have to also add that teachers and schools used to be there to do just that-teach. Now they're also being expected to not only teach the children, but raise them as well. Six and a half hours, five days a week in the classroom is not going to make up for absent parents and a bad home life, but that seems to be the assumption by some. Academic education was seen as the job of the teacher while instilling morals and values was seen as being the responsibility of the parent(s). Now in addition to having to teach very specific content to meet the expectations of standardized testing, teachers are also looked at to be surrogate parents. The demands put on teachers in the public system (and probaby private too) are much more than they used to be. Again, in an ideal world every child would have a good support system at home so that teachers could concentrate on teaching, but that's not the case. Those that have the luxury to lead the revolution in education will have to consider that they will be leading that revolution not only for themselves and their children, but for children who may come from very different backgrounds than they do. I'm all for overhauling the current public system, but those doing the overhaul will have to realize that it can't be tailored to their experiences and expectations alone.
Posted by J. E. on April 1, 2011 at 11:17 am | permalink |
Penelope, is it Generation Z that is going to transform education? Or is it their parents?
Posted by KateNonymous on April 1, 2011 at 4:54 pm | permalink |
That's interesting. Good point. I guess it's Gen X ers who are transforming education but I have a feeling that Gen Y will continue that transformation at work — which will make that transformation ripple beyond just the homeschooling years.
Penelope
Posted by Penelope Trunk on April 1, 2011 at 9:01 pm | permalink |
I agree with J.E. Even though students spent almost half of the day in the school, it is still in the home that these kids learn their values. I school,teachers are perceived to be the second parents of the students.But let us remember that the real parents, the family as a whole is where the child learns/develops his values & his character as well.
Posted by Lyean on April 1, 2011 at 11:06 pm | permalink |
why has no one pointed out that your kid is a badass? autobots, superman, AND a sword?! NICE!!
im bringing back that unapologetic creativity to whatever i do from now on. fantastic picture.
as far as education is concerned, it's the latest bubble that will pop. the future will be kids who take english at Stanford, math at MIT, entrepreneurship at the Univ. of Houston, etc., all at their convenience. it will be less homeschooling and more whenever/wherever-schooling. the authoritarian, industrial age education system is dying. to be successful, one must drop the hyperspecialization of the past and become a renaissance stucent of the future. we've entered the conceptual age, and few people see that.
Posted by Varun on April 2, 2011 at 3:11 am | permalink |
Penelope, I agree with your article. I am a product of the homeschooling movement, and I can vouch for the presence of families with high income, low income, various ethnic backgrounds, single parent or two parent households, etc. From my experience homeschooling was not something only for the white and wealthy; a family would often have to make sacrifices to keep their children at home, but those who did so considered it worth their pains.
Yes, there can be problems with socialization, but no more so for homeschooled children than for those in public or private schools! There are shy or antisocial people everywhere; the vast majority of homeschooled families I have met were involved not only in sports, dance, the arts, and so on, but also had a widespread community that enabled them to network in order to pursue areas of interest in both career and educational fields.
I attended public school briefly to see what it was like. Now I have a part-time job teaching a music class for a public school. It is apparent that many of the children I see (but I am not saying all) are unable to thrive in the school environment they are placed in every day. Shouldn't we want the best possible educational opportunities for our children? They need a place where they do not just squeak by or learn the bare essentials. This is a waste of their precious time that they should be using to blossom into the amazing human beings that they are meant to be. If school, public or private, is allowing your child to truly thrive as a growing person, then by all means, let them be educated in that environment! But if a child is not thriving, then something must be changed.
Posted by Lyssa on April 2, 2011 at 10:19 am | permalink |
brilliant post. thanks to Lisa Nielsen for directing me here.
i see public ed becoming school of choice, which in my mind means, everyone gets the free option to learn like authentic unschoolers – key being purely self-directed leaners. not just doing school as we know it on their own.
nothing is for everyone. public school can now offer everything. that's what we need. that's where we're headed.
the town is the school… separate buildings (schools as we now know them) are simply resource centers and meet up places. also available – a town art hall, a town engineering hall, etc. sharing spaces are wikipedia, youtube, wherever the crowd is. wherever sharing is most useful/accessible.
the 1-1 movement is spot on.. but it's one to one, face to face, mentors.. the declaration of interdependence.
so i see your unschooling wave for sure, facilitating that in public ed provides the equity we all seek. setting the culture of trust for that to happen, that's the pickle. but it's coming.
Posted by monika hardy on April 2, 2011 at 10:56 am | permalink |
I read that 1.5 to 2.7% of k12 students are currently home schooled; even if its growth rate is high (which it is) statistically it will take an extremely long time to become mainstream. I also wonder about the demographics of homeschooling families. the south Bronx families in the school where I have been consulting are extremely busy earning a living. Homeschooling would not be a option.
Posted by Jeff Branzburg on April 2, 2011 at 1:04 pm | permalink |
That's an interesting question — what does that statistic mean. I think the issue is 1% of what. if it's 1% of all students in the US, but that 1% is all people who are in the upper 10% of the income bracket, then it's going to have a big affect on the pool of candidates who enter Yale. It's going to have a big affect on who works at the next generation's equivalent of Facebook.
I know we are talking about privledge here. But I'm assuming that to even read this blog you are privledged — you have time to think about the higher Maslovian issues of what is good work, what is a meaningful life, etc. So to think about higher issues in terms of schooling seems in keeping with this community.
Penelope
Posted by Penelope Trunk on April 5, 2011 at 9:27 am | permalink |
"then it's going to have a big affect on the pool of candidates who enter Yale." Even granting "that 1% is all people who are in the upper 10% of the income bracket" (which isn't remotely true – most homeschool families are either driven by religious concerns or are hippie-types, both of which aren't very likely to be in the top 10% of income), what makes you think any more than 1% of the 1% would apply to Yale? (Again, that's very generous, but will credit your upper 10% assumption will cause these homeschoolers to be over-represented in Yale's applicant pool). And taking the thought further (as your Facebook comment does), why do you think whether some homeschoolers who have got in to Yale will have anything to do at all with the next one-in-a-million company? Oh, and don't forget about legacy applicants. And it's "effect". Get a clue.
Posted by Mark Erickson on August 2, 2011 at 6:05 pm | permalink |
I think education is mostly what you make of it. There are certainly factors that are out of the student's control that affect the quality of his or her education (the range of subjects offered or the viewpoint endorsed by the teacher), but what a student gets out of home school, public school, or private school is ultimately based on how much he or she wants out of what is being offered. I know home school kids who are well-rounded, well-socialized people with a lifetime commitment to learning. I also know private school students who expect everything to be spoon fed to them and can't get along with anyone. And I know people of many varieties in between. Ultimately, it's not the school the child goes to but the drive the child has to succeed that determines the outcome.
I also think that parenting style plays an important role. My parents sent my brother and I to public schools but were very involved in our education. They took us to the library, encouraged our interests in the arts and athletics, kept a close eye on our progress, and made sure we had the help we needed when we struggled. That attention and effort is what makes the difference in my opinion, regardless of where you send your kids.
Posted by Erin on April 2, 2011 at 10:43 pm | permalink |
Like a lot of other posters, I wonder about the socioeconomic forces at work here. It sees obvious that not all parents will be equally able — whether due to their workload or their own lack of education — to direct their own child's learning in a predictably productive way. (These are human beings, and children at that…I'd find it shockingly irresponsible for someone to "experiment" with their kid's life without being somewhat sure it'd turn out OK.) So what then? Do children of generational poverty just get told, "Sorry, the tax base went away so we defunded your schools…too bad you didn't have a parent who could or would homeschool you!"? All of these stories of homeschool success are impressive, and I'm a little jealous that I went to class while others got to stroll through museums and choose their own topics to research. But I fear that too often it comes coupled to an anti-government worldview that says, "We're not sending our kids to your schools, so we shouldn't have to pay for them anymore." Leaving the poor and undereducated to fend for themselves seems morally questionable. I totally support enlightened homeschoolers, as long as they don't jettison the idea of community when they start down that path. There are lots of reasons to continue to do the obviously terribly difficult work of figuring out how to improve free public education. Selfishness here is not going to pay off down the road.
And I worry a bit that all the stories of homeschool and unschooling success (happy to learn that term today!) might result in some folks committing a logical error. It may be that homeschoolers do better on tests or even have measurably better lives than those folks who attended public schools. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the method is a magic bullet. It seems obvious to me that the people who go in for homeschooling (and I'm leaving out for a moment those who are doing it not to broaden their kids' horizons but to shelter them from "outside influences") are measurably better off (as we discussed above) and probably above average in ability. Is it possible that all these Mandarin-learning 7 year old wunderkind are so successful because they come from great, supportive homes? In other words, might those same kids have benefited from that great, involved parenting had they attended public school? Not to say they didn't do even better with the non-traditional method…just saying that the parents might be far more influential than any particular of educational *process*. As someone who tried and failed to make a difference as a high school teacher, I can tell you that most parents were NOT that involved and I think that made a huge impact on their kids' education. Many worked too much to be able to. Many didn't grow up themselves with a ton of education, and came from communities that did not value education highly (a path too many of the rest of us seem to be headed down!). Many were just not great parents and couldn't be bothered. In any case, the solution is not to pull the plug and give up on free public education. These are kids! They can't help themselves — well, not fully — yet! If we consign them to the dustbin because of their poverty or their bad parents, I think we commit a terrible crime. I don't know what the answer is, but I'm sure it's not "every man for himself."
Posted by RandyS on April 3, 2011 at 6:34 pm | permalink |
Public schools are designed to create good worker bees and followers. Private schools create society's leaders. Home schools and alternative schools, like de-schooling and un-schooling, focus on fostering independent and creative thought, with the idea that each being has innate intelligence and that we only need to provide a wide berth for it to emerge unfettered.
My son attended a de-schooling environment for his first eight years. When he transferred to a regular public school for eighth grade, his teachers all remarked to me how incredible it was to them that he was so well-mannered, compassionate and that he would actually thank them for the class as he left the room.
He is remarkably self-possessed, as are the other children at his former school, and highly independent. He was in a classroom in public school recently where the class was being shown a graphically violent video depicting children permanently injuring themselves through reckless behaviour. He stood up and walked out of the class, based on a discussion we'd had on why not to watch over and over again images of people hurting themselves: because it programs your brain to do the same. The teacher flipped on him, threatening to call me and ordering him to return. He kept going and called me as soon as he got out of the class. I spoke with him and her, supporting his decision to leave the class, and more importantly, his ability to think for himself and not just take orders. He is perpetually stunned as he watches the other students in his classes do without questioning. He understands that he has a choice. They don't.
I agree with the other posters that home and alternative schooling isn't just a luxury for those who can afford it. I saw and experienced all walks of life in that environment and it comes down to prioritizing how you spend your time and money. Granted, extremes of poverty probably fall outside of this scale though.
Posted by Kim Anami on April 5, 2011 at 1:01 am | permalink |
And for those kids, what's the answer? Gutting free public education amounts to abandoning them. Can we get some of these products of other educational "systems" (homeschooling, etc.) to apply their experiences to find ways to improve the public schools? I know that's insanely difficult, but if the alternative is abandoning kids to crime and poverty because they didn't get educated is akin to creating a true, sanctioned underclass. I think that's poor policy, since we share our country with those people, and I think it's difficult to defend morally.
Again, to be clear, I'm thrilled (and, like I said, a little jealous) when I hear all these success stories. Frankly, hearing alternative education parents who don't sound like religious extremists is refreshing and forces me to reconsider the whole topic. I just want to make sure that, if in fact it's not practical or possible for ALL parents to do it (and I doubt it's possible), then I want to be sure that our society remains committed to free public education in whatever form can be made to work best.
Posted by RandyS on April 5, 2011 at 1:51 am | permalink |
@Randy S I'm not suggesting we cut public education. Frankly, I don't know what the answer is for "those kids." I stopped trying to change the world a long time ago and create my own reality instead. I had an interest in alternative education, so I studied, I researched and I found other methods that resonated with me. I chose them.
In some ways, I feel like the answer to your question goes deep. People have choices all the time–even people in unfavourable circumstances. I believe we all get opportunities to improve our lives that we either accept or decline. No one exists in a total vacuum. The interesting question to me, is what makes one person choose a path of growth, and another, stagnation? You hear stories about people who come from equally horrendous environments and one rises up and overcomes the past and another is squashed by it. Why? What separates them?
To me, the answer is courage. Courage to try something new and strike out against the majority that might be opposed to your different viewpoint. Courage to follow the road less travelled.
@ Emily. You are seriously boring me now. I'll pass you off to Ken Robinson and his TED talks about how education kills creativity. http://www.ted.com/talks/sir_ken_robinson_bring_on_the_revolution.html
@ Lyssa. Thank you!
Posted by Kim Anami on April 6, 2011 at 10:41 pm | permalink |
@ Kim –
For lack of better word, your son is brain-washed by your schooling. That's all.
And really, only public school create worker bees and followers? It's just the law of big numbers. I'd like to see what are doing the most of the de-schooling/home-schooling kids once they graduate.
Montessori is a education system commonly seen in my native country. It's very follow-your-bliss type of thing, and guess what? Not many kids flourish in that environment. That same happens to public school. Same with home-schooling. Although home-schooling sounds more like a fad, like giving birth at home, and growing your own vegetables.
Posted by Emily on April 5, 2011 at 7:19 am | permalink |
Growing your own vegetables is a fad? Birthing at home is a fad? If you look further back in time than your parents or grandparents, you'll see that mega grocery stores and c-section rates of 1 in 3 are the historical anomalies.
I'm just going to shake my head in awe and disbelief as I read the rest of this comment section.
Posted by Tracy on February 21, 2012 at 2:36 pm | permalink |
There isn't anything creative about repeating the tired trope about public schools producing "worker bees," as if you're actually qualified to conclude that the long list of leaders and innovators who did in fact go to public school succeeded in spite, not because, of their education.
This alone shows that you're spectacularly full of yourself. The bragging about your kid is just icing on that rather disgusting cake.
Posted by Sam on April 19, 2011 at 2:20 pm | permalink |
@ Emily. Fair enough, that may not have been the best example. Here are a few more.
I always resonated with what Rudolph Steiner had to say about not forcing academics too early on children. His belief was that by doing so, one would curtail right-brain development and creativity. In the pure Steiner teachings, a child wouldn't be taught to read until age nine, though they might pick it up on their own. In the school my son attended, which was similar to the Sudbury Valley School model, he chose which classes he attended and didn't attend. It was entirely self and student directed. What this typically meant, is that boys chose to play for most of their first 12 years. My son was no exception. By Steiner's philosophy, this would have been okay. By the non-coercive philosophy of his school, this was okay. For most modern parents, this would have been terrifying. I was keen to see what happened, having had the guidance of the other teachers and the school founder who had been doing this for 33 years.
What happened is this: by age 11/12, my son could barely read. He had the writing skills of a seven-year-old. But he had obtained sponsorship by a skateboarding company (his first love) and was winning contests and money and given free gear and tons of support and mentoring. When I put him into a regular public school for eighth grade (our current school didn't offer high school), that first year was hell-ish. My son had never done homework before. He never had to ask to use the washroom (that's an experience that will run you over $200-/hr in the hands of an experienced dominatrix). By grade nine, my son had an A grade in nearly all his academic classes. His highest mark was 98% in science, where, in his own words, he hardly did anything. He can read and write, has a fabulous vocabulary, though admittedly his written skills aren't strong; his typing is. What's going to be more useful for him?
His elective subjects for which he could see no use, he'd cut class to go skateboarding. Of his own accord, he prioritized his energy, understanding that his academic classes might be important and learning how to bake cookies wasn't useful to him. "If they'd teach me how to make myself a dinner, I'd go," he said. I think his marks in those classes were in the low double digits. I was fine with it, personally. We'd discussed that getting higher marks in the classes he deemed useless would be an issue in the upper grades for his overall average and he got that.
The woman who ran the school my son went to could take a student who had never done formal math at age 12 and in 20 hours, teach them everything up to sixth grade math. She did it time and time again. The key was that the child had to want to do it. They couldn't be forced to.
To be clear, I said that public schools are "designed" to create worker bees. The fact that brilliant (albeit often scarred) people still come out of them shows that somewhere along the way, those kids and people received mentorship or guidance or something that encouraged them to think outside the box and listen to their own internal guidance systems. Because the public schools are not set up to do that. They are set up to create a hierarchy. The most important thing my son received out of his experiences at a democratic school, was learning how to listen to his own innate wisdom and follow that. Priceless. Or, to put a price on it if one didn't get it, thousands and thousands in therapy down the road.
Posted by Kim Anami on April 5, 2011 at 9:26 am | permalink |
Well said, Kim! I couldn't agree with you more : )
Posted by Lyssa on April 5, 2011 at 9:35 am | permalink |
@ Kim
Thanks for the entertaining story, and again, you are cherry-picking.
You are going to find exceptional cases in all educational systems; you are going to find also really bad examples (Steiner with that New Agey thing has plenty of those, too).
I'd guess 'democratic' education systems help some children to follow their inner wisdom, and 'hierarchical' ones help others to become LEADERS; won't you agree?
PS Really, often 'scarred' people are coming from public schools? Thousands of dollars in therapy? Then those guys need to grow a backbone, for real.
Posted by Emily on April 5, 2011 at 10:14 pm | permalink |
@Kim –
Cute. I was personally introduced to Ken Robinson last May when he was here in Florida; so you're showing me nothing new there.
We are definitely not talking the same language here, so yes; agree that while your comments are entertaining, this exchange is not productive.
Posted by Emily on April 7, 2011 at 6:30 am | permalink |
Great post, tons of good links here. I followed the Inside Higher Ed link and loved that article, also watched some Dougald Hine video this morning and thought that was a great find.
Posted by Lance on April 8, 2011 at 7:35 am | permalink |
I'm a Classical honmeschooler Gen X mom who is fully setting her kids up to be entrepreneurs and take over the family business if they want. One wants to be an organic farmer, the other a diner owner, two can run the family business, and I have no idea where #6 will end up, probabaly on safari. But I'm teaching them Latin anyway. :-p
It's not just a luxury. We've sacrificed a lot to be able to homeschool all of them. I would rather do without than send them to a horrid public school and I can't afford to send them to private school. Not a luxury-a necessity.
Posted by justamouse on April 11, 2011 at 12:09 pm | permalink |
Homeschooling may be becoming "mainstream" in terms of social acceptance, it is not becoming "mainstream" in the sense of "done by the majority". In 2007, about 2.9% of school-aged children were home-schooled. It's tough to argue that something 3% of a generation is doing is going to shape the entire generation.
Posted by RickF on April 11, 2011 at 3:40 pm | permalink |
The %age stat representative of all homeschoolers can't be accurate. In states like Texas, parents are not required to register their children. I'm pretty sure Texas has an enormous number of homeschooling families who wouldn't be listed in that statistic.
Posted by Tracy on April 13, 2011 at 11:15 pm | permalink |
There are two things which are clear to me:
1) the author is a mother, whose kids are yet too young and she has an idealized image of what they are and what their future is.
2) for some reason the author/mother became obsessed with homeschooling.
The post basically ignores all the potential challenges and risk, which this Generation Z is already facing or may be facing. Essentially, they have been pointed out in the comments already.
Secondly, everybody has a right to his/her own opinion, but arguments on advantages of homeschooling are so one-sided, so unbalanced, that they create image of some unhealthy maniacal obsession.
If you have a kid studying at home you leave him out of a whole range of social situations, besides the mechanical process of learning.
How those kids are going to learn to communicate and act maturely in random social situation, which basically define adult life?
In pre-public-education times kids where simply playing in the streets. But they won't do this today, they will play video-games and surf Internet.
My immediate idea is that homeschooling today will create some sort of an autist, not a self-driven professional.
Posted by Dereks on April 12, 2011 at 4:19 pm | permalink |
My knee-jerk reaction is to argue against your flagrant use of hyperbole, but I'll ignore that and stick with the crux of your argument.
Two things. First, you said:
// … arguments on advantages of homeschooling are so one-sided, so unbalanced, that they create image of some unhealthy maniacal obsession. //
On what are you basing this? My wife and I have researched homeschooling — the good AND the bad — exhaustively and we have found arguments on both sides of the line. Something tells me you haven't really looked into this and you're just following popular misconceptions.
Second, you said:
// If you have a kid studying at home you leave him out of a whole range of social situations, besides the mechanical process of learning.
How those kids are going to learn to communicate and act maturely in random social situation, which basically define adult life? //
If you think exposure to the artificial social strata of the typical public school classroom will teach a child to, "act maturely in random social situations," then you haven't been in a public school classroom before. As a matter of fact, homeschooled children tend to be exposed to vast array of adults (read: not a conglomerate of children with one adult); much more so than their public schooled peers. And if you think I'm way off base, track down a home school grad and see how well they communicate, then you can really decide for yourself.
Posted by TheShan on April 12, 2011 at 4:47 pm | permalink |
//On what are you basing this? My wife and I have researched homeschooling â the good AND the bad â exhaustively and we have found arguments on both sides of the line. Something tells me you haven't really looked into this and you're just following popular misconceptions.
Exactly, I posses next to nothing expert knowledge on the subject and I wasn't really arguing with the conclusions. Just saying that they aren't strong enough. As an example why, I simply used one of the 'popular misconceptions', which crossed my mind.
Because if there are popular misconceptions about some idea/subject you're almost obliged to address them.
You've said it yourself: you've studied both good and the bad. The post, on the other hand, makes it look like it's only good out there. There is not a single word about potential (fictional or whatever) downside.
It may well be true that homeschooling is actually better than public education, but you don't prove the statement to be true simply by saying "because it is so".
Posted by Dereks on April 12, 2011 at 5:40 pm | permalink |
#1 is a direct hit. Fortunately Penelope is a high-level thinker as well as a mother, so even if she overstates her case a bit, there's a lot of great stuff to take from it. I can't say the same of other (mostly female) commenters on here, who base entire arguments on the motherly feeling that "my child is the most special child in the world, way too special to go to school."
Posted by Sam on April 19, 2011 at 2:25 pm | permalink |
Dereks, I write about the misconceptions of homeschooling in my blog. Please feel free to read the entries there; I am a teacher, and I have been studying various systems of education for several years.
Posted by Lyssa on April 12, 2011 at 9:12 pm | permalink |
I didn't actually mean to compare or evaluate particular "systems of education". I also have many issues with public system of education (I am not from US actually, and I know for sure, that there is a great deal of difference between public schools in my country and in the US), but my concern was mainly about general school experience, about what happens "in between". And I do think that this experience is very important, maybe even more important, than the formalities with classes, home assignments and grades. And can't really imagine how can it be replaced with parent patronizing, which homeschooling is by definition. I just see public school attendance as a sort of "wildlife experience", where a kid is exposed to the wide range of possible unpredictable events, opposed to the 'artificial' cultivation in a botanical garden, set up by homeschooling parents.
Posted by Dereks on April 13, 2011 at 6:02 pm | permalink |
I find it interesting that so many people are commenting that homeschooling is expensive. We are homeschoolers and it costs a FRACTION of what it cost to send my kid to school – yes, PUBLIC education – buying materials and clothing and paying sports and activities fees, field trip fees, lunch money for food that isn't even healthy – all of these things are costly. This way, we are able to buy things when we can afford them, go on trips after we've saved money. I quit my job when we realized that me working = my entire paycheck going to daycare. I'm saving my family money by staying home and spending the time it takes to be frugal.
Posted by Missy on April 13, 2011 at 9:55 am | permalink |
The "cost" of homeschooling is going to vary significantly by family. The bulk of the cost is in lost income from the stay-at-home parent with some savings from not having to pay for daycare – but for most families that lost income is going to be more than 0.
Frankly, the savings in clothes, food and school-supplies are going to be minimal compared to public school. After all, the kids still need to be clothed and fed, right? They haven't outlawed the bag lunch have they? It may feel cheaper because you are deciding what to buy and when, but it probably comes out pretty darn close.
Posted by RickF on April 13, 2011 at 12:56 pm | permalink |
You haven't looked at an average woman's wages in this country lately, have you? Absent a professional degree, the average mom cannot make enough in wages to cover her work expenses, especially if the household carries debt. With the professional degree, it depends on the profession and even then she's not paid as much as a man in the equivalent position. (There's a reason gay households tend to be high-earning, even if they adopt a child.) And some of us don't have kids only to pay someone else to raise them. Does no one ever do their own work anymore in this country? What's next, do we outsource breathing?
Posted by Anonymous on November 21, 2011 at 1:01 am | permalink |
PS – I also find it HILARIOUS when people bring up the "socialization" thing to me. Making friends during class gets you in trouble at school. You aren't supposed to be talking and cultivating relationships during class if you're "learning" – so lunch and after school activities are where kids are cultivating relationships. My kids still do all those activities – swim team, cub scouts, play groups, church, Sunday School, hiking with friends, art classes at the local museum… the list goes on.
Posted by Missy on April 13, 2011 at 9:57 am | permalink |
Socialization doesn't mean going out and making friends. It means training children in the social mores of your culture. Basically it means teaching them how to behave properly in their social group. Children are incapable of socializing children, for this reason. If a woman were capable of having thirty children in one pregnancy and decided to do so, we'd all call her insane, and with good reason. Yet we don't bat an eyelash at a teacher being responsible for the socialization of thirty children close to the same age for six to eight hours a day. These kids are not getting enough reinforcement from parents to understand right and wrong in any sense (not just or only Biblical). They're being raised by adult strangers, both in the classroom and on TV.
Posted by Anonymous on November 21, 2011 at 12:55 am | permalink |
PPS: And saying this is racial is just silly. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Uzoma-Black-Unschoolers-Conference/132723713406769?sk=info
Posted by Missy on April 13, 2011 at 9:58 am | permalink |
You'd be surprised, Missy. Bringing lunches to school is already being challenged. http://www.vendingmarketwatch.com/web/online/VendingMarketWatch-News/Chicago-School-Bans-Brown-Bag-Lunch/1$29622
Posted by Lyssa on April 13, 2011 at 1:04 pm | permalink |
Oops, sorry, I meant to direct that last post to RickF not Missy.
Posted by Lyssa on April 13, 2011 at 1:06 pm | permalink |
Academia is an elitist entity. Always has been. There is a trend of more entrepreneurship. That is the wave of the future. Also, have you noticed that the cost of university continues to rise and never falls? Is that really sustainable? Anyone that knows anything about real economics knows that it isn't.
Posted by santiago on April 13, 2011 at 4:30 pm | permalink |
I think there is still value in a University education for specialized vocations. For example, I do not view the degree I am seeking, and the money I am spending on it as worthless because without doing this I would not be able to do my future job. I want to teach music in public school. This requires a degree in music education. Also, I feel like my degree program has prepared me well for teaching. At my university many of the classes are lab type environment. Not only do we discuss learning theories, but we actually write lesson plans and teach each other. I also spend much type in my classes running rehearsals and being graded on my performance. I also have gained a thorough knowledge of music including instrument performance, theory, private lessons, history, technology, and more. These are not things I would have learned necessarily "on the job." I also feel that several of my other friends who are engineers, nurses, doctors, web designers, social workers, and other types of teachers find their degrees and the education they received while getting them to be extremely valuable.
Now, let me tell you about my husband. He is getting a Bachelor's of general studies in film. I don't think he has found his degree to very valuable. I know for fact, he wishes he had gotten a degree in something else. This also applies to my sister-in-law who got her bachelor's in sociology. They both have the general skills that one acquires from getting a college degree. They are generally knowledgeable (we kill at trivia), organized, know how to do research, have strong communications skills, and they posses highly developed critical thinking skills. I think these are skills that are applicable to many jobs, but I fear they both will be stuck doing jobs that are not fulfilling for them.
The problem with my generation (I think it is generation Y. I was born in 87) is that we are not always seeking practical degrees. I remember being told to study what I love, and what interest me. College is valuable when you have a career plan in mind after graduation. College should not be a time filler after high school. It should be a means to an end.
Posted by Ashley on April 13, 2011 at 11:46 pm | permalink |
Note to self: proof-read comments before posting next time. Sorry for typos and grammatical errors in my first comment.
Posted by Ashley on April 13, 2011 at 11:48 pm | permalink |
I agree, getting a degree that will help further one's future career in a practical way is advisable. But college is not for everyone, as Ashley said, so if someone does not have very specific goals in mind that a degree will accomplish, then I would say it is better to not go to college. Instead, pursue another form of career training, save up some money by working an "in-between" job, or maybe even become an entrepreneur. With the costs of higher education going through the roof today it is better to not waste your time and money if you have no purpose for attending college yet.
Posted by Lyssa on April 14, 2011 at 8:42 am | permalink |
As marketing is getting more direct and measured, these Gen Z up and comers are going to know what they want and when they want it. They'll be looking for entertainment value just as much if not more than product value.
Posted by Darius on April 14, 2011 at 12:18 pm | permalink |
Sorry to burst the bubble on this one, but I disagree with the underlying premise.
The notion of self-directed learning in a home-school environment in my mind is even more threatened by the very fact that the accessibility to certain types of technology make it near impossible to teach the one skill that is most important to Entrepreneurship – Perseverance.
Here is my premise- Today's technology which is setup to handle the least number of steps to get to a point of instant gratification is easily accessible to young people. Having said that, their entire modality of thinking and solving problems is "oh its broken, lets throw it away". This notion of disposability carries over into work, personal lives, and ultimately also has a huge impact on how the country itself operates. This is clearly evident in how we have shipped off jobs that our own work force is incapable of handling or solving.
The interactions with other students in a classroom setting, the ability for a teacher to recognize and challenge students to take the three extra steps to get to answer– aren't even considerations for many parents looking to self-educate their children.
There are important factors here that I believe are seriously overlooked per the article, and its desperate need to figure out how to educate a child given these daunting circumstances.
Let's even take Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook or Bill Gates of Microsoft as examples…They both dropped out of college, but BOTH have recently challenged the notion that students are woefully behind in skills acquisition, and have short attention spans.
I dont see homeschooling suddenly fixing this larger endemic and serious problem.
Posted by Popbubbleburst on April 17, 2011 at 8:30 pm | permalink |
Generational generalizations only get you so far, as the distribution of interests, talents, and drive within generations produce widely disparate individual outcomes. Just as most baby boomers aren't as self-obsessed as the caricature, most Gen X parents are more economically convensional than you suggest, and the vast majority still send their kids to public schools. While the rate of home schooling increases, and that could lead to the rate of intentional college skipping increasing when these kids hit college age, these are marginal effects. Hopefully these marginal effects will worry those of us running colleges enough that we will continue to work hard to improve student learning and post-graduation outcomes for our students, including increasing the flexibility with which students can pursue college and graduate education. But we are hardly going to see a dramatic decline in the proportion of high school graduates aspiring to a college degree over the next 20 years.
Posted by Bob Duniway on May 2, 2011 at 12:42 pm | permalink |
I think where this goes off-track is the assumption/premise that public schools are largely terrible. I think this is a common belief based on speculation generated without evidence by politicians. If the education system is so irrevocably broken, why are we still a thriving nation? While we may be in an economic downtime, none of this is due to the education system. Students are coming out of schools well prepared at as high a rate as ever.
Posted by Doug Harvey on May 3, 2011 at 6:59 pm | permalink |
I attended public school in two countries and four school districts (five if you count a few weeks right after we moved to a new state, to finish out the school year). Yes, public schools ARE terrible. And they're worse since I graduated. If you don't understand what you are missing, you would think everything was OK. I need only examine the response of this nation to the events of 9/11 to see that we are ill-equipped to be leaders of the free world or whatever nonsense we've styled ourselves after now. We think we can solve every problem with a dollar bill in one hand and an M16 in the other. Real education would have shown us otherwise.
Posted by Anonymous on November 21, 2011 at 12:58 am | permalink |
I don't think it's just public schools, but private schools as well. My experience came being in math, science, and computer classes in college(various levels) and seeing how even the "best" US students were so far behind the foreign students. Also, by seeing that the majority of professors were also foreign born. It forced me to conclude that either a)Americans are genetically less capable of learning(which I reject) or b) That Americans are less prepared for college-level quantitative fields, largely due to an obsolete curriculum that is behind other nations(which, after learning what some classmates had done in high school, I accepted).
Posted by Laura Lawson on November 25, 2011 at 10:52 am | permalink |
I would like to say a word in defense of us "baby boomers." For the most part, we did not homeschool because we did not even know it was an option. Homeschooling was still in its infancy and was not generally acknowledged. We sent our kids to public schools (even when we knew they were awful) because we thought we HAD to. It wasn't until I went back to college at the age of 35 that I discovered that I could have been homeschooling my children all along. Back then, most of us still believed that the government was trustworthy and was interested in our own good. We were not stupid or "scared." We were simply uninformed.
Posted by Dawn Varner on May 13, 2011 at 6:37 am | permalink |
Yes that was definitely true of my "baby boomer" sister and absolutely was true of my "war babies" parents. They didn't think of homeschooling at all because they hadn't heard of the possibility. And for a long long while, homeschooling was considered to be illegal even though it wasn't.
Posted by Katherine Anderson on May 13, 2011 at 7:49 pm | permalink |
What he said…I barely found out that I could homeschool my kids. I'm at the end of the boomer generation and I'm thankful to that 2 of my friends looked into homeschooling before I did.
Jana
Posted by Jana on May 14, 2011 at 11:39 am | permalink |
"then, most of us still believed that the government was trustworthy and was interested in our own good."
Not just for schools, but in general, HUH????????????? Government provides many incredibly valuable services, but I think to trust is very naive, just as naive as trusting businesses to put ethics first.
Posted by Laura Lawson on November 25, 2011 at 10:47 am | permalink |
Thought-provoking post.
It's clear that we're headed into a future where those who can think independently and are willing to tackle entrepreneurship will have more security, if there is any such thing in this world, than sheeple. Homeschooling gives our kids the best chance to develop an independent mindset. (John Taylor Gatto has written extensively on this topic, btw.)
Yes, I'm biased; I homeschooled my four kids through high school. They're now 18-27 and doing just fine. (If they're not socialized, they're doing a pretty good imitation of it.)
Posted by Barbara Frank on May 20, 2011 at 3:49 pm | permalink |
While I can certainly hope that most of your assumptions come true, I can't help but think you're looking through rose-colored glasses. There's not one mention of how Gen Z might turn out for the worse. I'm sure when I was growing up, there were plenty of articles like this stating how wonderful Gen Y will be and how we will become societies leaders… blah, blah blah. Each generation has its strengths and weaknesses, and I'm sure Gen Z will be no different. In addition, I've always wondered about the external factors that affect the development of a generation, such as our current recession. How would Gen Y be viewed if the economy hadn't tanked? I'm sure people would be telling us how smart we were for going to college and getting a degree. You can't separate Gen Y from the recession than you can the Boomers from Vietnam or the "Greatest Generation" from the Depression or WWII. I wonder what Gen Z has to look forward to.
Posted by Sean on August 3, 2011 at 7:49 pm | permalink |
I am a Gen Xer. I'm married, have 4 kids, and am self employed. My wife stays home with the kids, and the 2 oldest (8 and 6) go to our district's charter school, which provides a superior education, and is publicly funded, though at a reduced rate. Parents must provide a little extra to the school to help defray costs. Right now my yearly income is around $30,000 – $35,000. We rent a home, and we get by. I only completed some college, but have no school debt to pay for. I intend to make much more in the coming years, and in this country, there is no reason not to. We have been thinking about homeschooling for some time now, not because our kids are not getting a great education; they are. But we want the flexibility and the more hands on learning that home schooling provides. With today's supplemental programs for home schooled kids, they are socially integrated and will not have the typical social skill problems that many home school kids have or used to have.
My point is, I am not rich…yet. I have no formal education, but that will not stop me from making something of myself, and providing for my family. Racial boundaries in small business exist only in the minds of those who will allow them to. I'm a carpenter by trade, and have learned as I worked. Being black, Hispanic or Asian would not have altered that in any way. The working poor exist in many areas, but it is by choice. Get on a bus and move. It's a free country, and no one can tell you what you can or cannot earn. If you have a racist boss, leave. Grow flowers in your backyard and sell them. Start a catering business. Re-upholster furniture. Detail cars. Anything is possible, but only if you believe in yourself. The Man can only keep you down if you don't walk away. You can do it, and if your kids are that important to you, then you WILL find a way. Stop letting everyone else control your kids' destinies. YOU are the parent. Act like it!
Posted by Ryan on August 11, 2011 at 12:48 am | permalink |
The only way no one can tell you what you can and cannot earn is if you're going out and stealing the money. If you're employed, the buck stops with your boss; if you're self-employed, you are at the mercy of the marketplace.
It's true that people can choose how to respond to life's circumstances but you're still blaming the victim (in the sense of "victim" as "target of harmful action taken"). I'm just a little weirded out that you think yelling at a person who's been injured in some way is going to make their injury hurt less for them. Why does no one choose to yell at the injurER instead? Occupy Wall Street's doing it now and people like you think they're crazy. Do we worship bullies in this country or something? I'm thinking maybe yes. What does that say about us? We shouldn't be in a recession or have any working poor (or any other kind) if all it took was beating up the disadvantaged.
Posted by Anonymous on November 21, 2011 at 12:53 am | permalink |
Big missing piece of this essay: homeschooled kids think they are smarter than they are and that they know more than they do and are surprised when they are wrong. (After all, their teachers were their doting parents who thought they really were "the best" instead of more objective professionals, teachers, who could put their work in perspective.) Also, kids who don't go to college and kids who go to community college just don't have the critical thinking skills and writing ability of college students. This will hurt the workplace and the economy. Finally, homeschooled kids can't just skip entire areas that don't interest them when they are faced with the ordinary, boring drudgery parts of every job, even entrepreneurship.
Posted by Mommy Entrepreneur on September 23, 2011 at 11:06 pm | permalink |
Wow, I hope you don't include yourself as one of these "objective professionals". So from reading your comment are you trying to say that you don't think "your smarter" or that your children are "smarter" than homeschooled children? I was homeschooled myself by one of these "doting" parents. He was every bit as qualified to teach me as any teacher. Why? He was a teacher. Fully certified with twenty years of teaching Junior High School to High School in science, electronics, and mathematics. He worked in several public schools, rich and poor, and knew well their limits. I have gone through University graduating with a a degree in Biochemistry. Guess I'll always be one of those "homeschooled" failures you speak of cause I didn't have information beat into my school. The reality is there are fantastic teachers out there who do a lot for their students but they are very few and very far between. With their parents running the education show in Public School those teachers are being driven out of education adding to its dismal state. So I blame parents most of all for its current state, not teachers.
Posted by MMM on September 25, 2011 at 3:12 pm | permalink |
Wow, I hope you don't include yourself as one of these "objective professionals". So from reading your comment are you trying to say that you don't think "your smarter" or that your children are "smarter" than homeschooled children? I was homeschooled myself by one of these "doting" parents. He was every bit as qualified to teach me as any teacher. Why? He was a teacher. Fully certified with twenty years of teaching Junior High School to High School in science, electronics, and mathematics. He worked in several public schools, rich and poor, and knew well their limits. I have gone through University graduating with a a degree in Biochemistry. Guess I'll always be one of those "homeschooled" failures you speak of cause I didn't have information beat into my school. The reality is there are fantastic teachers out there who do a lot for their students but they are very few and very far between. With their parents running the education show in Public School those teachers are being driven out of education adding to its dismal state. So I blame parents most of all for its current state, not teachers.
Posted by MMM on September 25, 2011 at 3:12 pm | permalink |
What about when you are terribly interested in a topic but you never get to learn about it in school because it's not in the curriculum for the year, and your parents can't afford to buy a lot of books and you live too far from the public library, so you can't tackle it at home either?
When people are forced to rely solely upon schools for education, this sort of thing happens.
Posted by Anonymous on November 21, 2011 at 1:10 am | permalink |
If the parents can't afford books and don't live near a library, sounds like their best bet would be to "rely on the school."
Posted by Gretchen on January 3, 2012 at 10:38 pm | permalink |
No one needs to be near a library to homeschool thanks to the Internet. There are so many good classical books available, many for free, and sites like KhanAcademy.org offer free instructional videos. Then there are the free college courses online…..anyone with an Internet connection can homeschool.
Posted by Barbara Frank on January 4, 2012 at 11:45 am | permalink |
Many of the comments, though thought provoking, are missing the big picture. I am a public school teacher. I love my job and enjoy helping every child every day.
I welcome parents who are home schooling their children. It takes courage and time to properly meet state and federal guidelines when undertaking the process of educating one's child at home. My position is that I will be available to assist parents as they are instructing their child.
I only ask that we all understand that educating children is not a competition. It is not "me" verses "you", or I am better at this than you. Rather, we must work together to provide the best authentic education possible for EVERY child. I am in the public schools because I know there are many who can not afford to stay home to teach their child. I want to make sure that I am providing the best of everything for their child, just as I would for my own children.
Teacher and school bashing are not the solution. Teamwork and providing whatever it takes for our children, our future leaders, is the bottom line on which we should be focusing.
This needs to be done. As Wilford Brimley says, "It's the right thing to do."
Feel free to comment. This tells me that education is not dead. It is heating up, and our comments and commitment are just making it hotter. No, education is not dead, it is just changing into something bigger and better.
Posted by Douglas Cline on September 24, 2011 at 7:34 pm | permalink |
We're more bad-school-bashing than school-bashing. Not that I think in the end any school can ever be completely "good." The teachers, sure, but the institution itself seems almost to be designed to do anything *but* educate children.
I agree this isn't about competition though. I cringe when I see people bragging about homeschoolers being four grades ahead of their age-peers in school. What about the kids who are slower in learning certain skills? What about the kids who retain information just long enough to take the finals but then forget everything they "learned"? (That happens a LOT in schools.) There are so many variables here.
Posted by Anonymous on November 21, 2011 at 1:08 am | permalink |
What makes you think that everyone who homeschools their kids does a good job? Most homeschooled kids I've encountered are pathetically ignorant, learn only their parent's point of view, and can't pass any college entrance exam, so it's a good thing they aren't interested in college. Public education is in deep trouble, but people like you who just complain about it and spread the media hype aren't helping to correct the situation.
Posted by Ourclassroomfamily on September 25, 2011 at 12:06 pm | permalink |
Good Lord, talk about a slanted view. I was homeschooled 11-16 and I passed all of my entrance exams with ease. Most of my friends are shocked to learn I was ever homeschooled as I act "normal". I've met many other homeschoolers and unschoolers who are some of the most well-adjusted adults I know. They don't live in fear of not fitting in unlike a lot of "public school" educated of my age. In my opinion, the main difference between public school educated and homeschooled (or unschooled) is that one sets its highest priority on "fitting in and being popular" while the other wants to succeed to the best of their abilities. Of course, perhaps I'm biased as well, but at least I'll admit to that.
Posted by Themstar2011 on September 25, 2011 at 3:04 pm | permalink |
Good Lord, talk about a slanted view. I was homeschooled 11-16 and I passed all of my entrance exams with ease. Most of my friends are shocked to learn I was ever homeschooled as I act "normal". I've met many other homeschoolers and unschoolers who are some of the most well-adjusted adults I know. They don't live in fear of not fitting in unlike a lot of "public school" educated of my age. In my opinion, the main difference between public school educated and homeschooled (or unschooled) is that one sets its highest priority on "fitting in and being popular" while the other wants to succeed to the best of their abilities. Of course, perhaps I'm biased as well, but at least I'll admit to that.
Posted by Themstar2011 on September 25, 2011 at 3:04 pm | permalink |
Good Lord, talk about a slanted view. I was homeschooled 11-16 and I passed all of my entrance exams with ease. Most of my friends are shocked to learn I was ever homeschooled as I act "normal". I've met many other homeschoolers and unschoolers who are some of the most well-adjusted adults I know. They don't live in fear of not fitting in unlike a lot of "public school" educated of my age. In my opinion, the main difference between public school educated and homeschooled (or unschooled) is that one sets its highest priority on "fitting in and being popular" while the other wants to succeed to the best of their abilities. Of course, perhaps I'm biased as well, but at least I'll admit to that.
Posted by Themstar2011 on September 25, 2011 at 3:04 pm | permalink |
Actually, if you'll do some statistical research about homeschoolers you'll find that on average, homeschoolers test 4 years ahead of public schools by the eighth grade! In addition, homeschools get an amazing point of view because they are allowed access to many different types of situations and people. If the POV you're speaking of is based on religion, that is a wonderful aspect of homeschooling as well. Raising well educated, morally sound, kids who have a strong sense of self is an awesome edeavour that I would whole-heartedly encourage parents to look into.
As with any school there are going to be good and bad. Don't base your entire outlook of homeschooling on one or two homeschoolers "gone wrong".
Posted by a name is a name on October 31, 2011 at 12:32 pm | permalink |
I used to spend a lot of time on a LiveJournal community for my town that was populated heavily with Ohio State students. The level of intellect I saw displayed in that community was shockingly substandard. I attended school myself in 2003-2004 (dropped back out for personal reasons) and it was just like being back in high school–and high school didn't exactly exercise our intellects either. This isn't education. This is answering the right questions in just the right way in order to acquire a piece of paper. It's a lab rat moving a lever to get the cheese. Which is wonderful if all you want to be in life is a white rodent doing tricks for food. Some of us want more than that out of life.
The public schools are the ones claiming that we can't possibly do without them and that education happens nowhere else but within their own walls. If you're going to hold someone to account for poor quality of education, start there. Especially since your taxes are going to fund those places.
Even when someone is poorly educated, too, once you reach the age of majority it's incumbent upon you to guide your own education from that point on–because you never stop learning your whole life, at least not if you know what's good for you.
I have easily learned several times what I learned in public school, *outside* of public school. And I mean both during my K-12 "career" and ever since.
Posted by Anonymous on November 21, 2011 at 1:06 am | permalink |
really a great post..
The learning period of your baby starts the day he/she is born.
This is the time when you can inculcate values in babies and build an emotional bond with them.
http://posts.fanbox.com/jff84
Posted by marengo on October 17, 2011 at 10:11 am | permalink |
really a great post..
The learning period of your baby starts the day he/she is born.
This is the time when you can inculcate values in babies and build an emotional bond with them.
http://posts.fanbox.com/jff84
Posted by marengo on October 17, 2011 at 10:11 am | permalink |
I myself am part of Generation Y and I am currently struggling, like many others, with this new juxtaposition of graduate school research and post-undergrad life. While I see the truth in your comment that Gen Y are "rule followers", I have to wonder if trading in a college degree for on-the-job training will eventually become the norm. I work with a group of artists and researchers who, among other things, are trying to investigate the way society drives culture. In light of this goal, we interviewed a current college student grappling with the unsettling unknown after graduation ( http://whoweam.com/portraits/elise-danielson/ ). Her parent and, I argue, society encouraged her to take on a more demanding course load to finish her degree in order to ultimately be successful. Also, if employers are largely looking to hire a qualified employee, how can Gen Y recent graduates NOT attend college? Are employment and capital the only variables of success? Since when did we have to write off our wants and passions in order to put food on the table?
Posted by Ela Locke on October 20, 2011 at 9:08 am | permalink |
Okay, I think you are a bit off on home-school and baby boomers. The pioneers of home schooling or re-discovering home school were the baby boomers. They did home school before it was cool. I happen to be one of them. It is disingenuous to categorize so cut and dry in your categories. History is not this generation did this in a vacuum, history is actually beliefs in action. A return to personal responsibility would not be one generation's accomplishment, but an acknowledgement of past thought processes of right and wrong.
Posted by GC on October 24, 2011 at 8:06 am | permalink |
I certainly don't expect my children to go to college. Big waste of money that is for sure, besides I won't even have my student loans paid off by then.
Posted by Lak on November 2, 2011 at 2:04 am | permalink |
Oh, I still have a feminist ax to grind for the workplace. When you have courts ruling that women can be forced to wear makeup and heels to work while men cannot, and my feet are too wide and heels just kill me and I hate having makeup melting on my face all day, well, let's just say it gets real old. That and I'm at the age where no one wants to hire me without a PhD, because I'm not young and cute enough. All of this is why I'm not in the workplace. To borrow from a famous comedian, I don't want to be a member of any club that won't have me.
Also, there is a place for memorization in education. I'm not saying it's the only thing that should be taught, but if we are talking about a set of facts that pretty much don't ever change, and having these facts committed to memory means you spend less time trying to remember them later in an argument or in an act of intellectual synthesis, let's just say it's faster to remember something than to look it up on Google. And brains don't tend to lose Internet connections or drop cell phone signals. The one thing I remember memorizing in public school was the times tables and just that has helped me immensely in life.
I wish my Boomer parents had been competitive. All they seemed to want to do was yell at me. I got some dysfunctional Boomers, me.
Posted by Anonymous on November 21, 2011 at 12:49 am | permalink |
Through that time you are able to increase moncler jackets for women your own understanding method moncler down jacket men as moncler jackets on sale uk well as customize your Moncler Shop own songs Moncler Jackets For Women reading through.
Posted by aaccddsuny on November 28, 2011 at 9:56 pm | permalink |
Thank you for the good writeup. It in truth used to be a entertainment account it. Glance complex to far brought agreeable from you! However, how could we be in contact?
Posted by uk directories on December 6, 2011 at 7:38 pm | permalink |
You've got a a nice bunch of posts here now. Keep it up!!
Posted by Alishia Harrod on December 20, 2011 at 11:30 am | permalink |
Amazing article. Some profound revelations (for me anyway). Particularly enjoyed your succinct summary of each generations revolution. Politics, family, work, education. I love reading your stuff. Thankyou.
Posted by Danny on December 31, 2011 at 11:48 pm | permalink |
I know this is now an old post, but when you say "The homeschooling movement will prepare Generation Y to skip college, and Gen X is out-of-the-box enough in their parenting to support that" don't you mean the movement will prepare Gen *Z* and Gen *Y* is going to support that?
Posted by Gretchen on January 3, 2012 at 4:49 am | permalink |
From my Facebook:
Justice Lynn Erikson So my thoughts: Yes, exactly my point, thank you. As a real, live unschooler (and Gen Z teen) I can say that I have a pretty good idea of what I want out of life and how to get there. I know how to get the skills I will need to create my life how I want it, and I think this will make me a happier person overall. I agree that nobody should pay for college – it's just not worth it these days. Personally, lucky duck me get's to go to a great alternative college for free, so I'm going for the sake of having the experience and really forming myself as a person, but in the strange event that I don't get in, I'm just going to get on with my life and work towards my dreams.
I also think that the North Star: Self-Directed Learning for Teens model is something that can really facilitate the need for Gen Z homeschooling/unschooling. So Ken Danford, Sarah Reid, Catherine Gobron, and Ellen Morbyrne, get more North Starsout there, would you? I'll help.
I suggest that anyone interested in unschooling check out northstarteens.org and the AERO organization. I've been involved with the start-up of a few North Star model learning centers, and I think they're the way to go. This is how they work:
The learning center provides open resources (homework-free non-mandatory classes, personal tutors, field trips, community engagement, community college connections, etc.) to kids coming out of the school system or out of that antisocial homeschool void. The kids are checked-in with, and encouraged, but never made to do anything other than be respectful to each other and the staff. The learning center has places to be social, places to study/read/be alone, places to have tutorials, places to be rowdy, and places to have classes in the building ideally. The staff (college interns, retired professors, parents, random community members) are around to share the talents that they possess and to give some guidance. The check in staff check in with members about what they need support with, how they're doing, what their goals are, what they're doing, etc.
That's the basics, check out the website for more info. Also feel free to email me @ jlynnquaker@gmail.com if you want to ask me anything.
Posted by Justice Lynn Erikson on January 12, 2012 at 4:25 pm | permalink |
LOVE this article! I am homeschooling my 10-year-old son and I see all of these points manifesting themselves in him. He is already very focused on his future career as an architect and specifically asked that we add "business acumen" to our weekly studies as he wants to be an entrepreneur. And YES, the educational system needs an overhaul – this generation with our help and leadership (as their parents), can be the ones to make it happen.
Posted by Janet on January 16, 2012 at 11:00 pm | permalink |
I am a homeschooling mom with a Gen Z kid. I agree with most of the article. Home schoolers are self-starters and can be very independent. I believe with technology, my Gen Z kid will have many new options on how to go to college without running up a huge tab. The emphasis will be on convenience. Huge institutions will become extinct dinosaurs, replaced by modern "testing only" centers. Professors will become "computer-aids" only. Their impact will be diminished, they will explain the syllabus and hand out final grades. Everything needed will be on-line and at the disposal of the Gen X'er at their convenience. It will be hard for the "Baby Boomers & GEN X's" too let go of the traditional universities they love so much. But future Gener's won't care because they live in a society that is more than just the city or state they live in. They will think nothing of moving to another state or country if needed. They think in terms of stream lining the process and the old way of "traditional university" doesn't fit into the new way of thinking. A majority of the public school kids will be playing catch-up most of their lives. Living on the back end of the business curve – not out in front with the independent self-starter home schoolers.
On another note, I started reading all the comments and somehow the topic changed from home schooling to apprenticeship vs degree'd. I have to comment on this. My husband has three degrees. One BS and two MS (Math and Physics w/emphasis in Semi-conductor Eng). He works for a leading company in his field. Over the years he has seen many engineers with PHD's be hired as hands on engineers only to only leave within a year or two. This is because they were used to a class room or lab setting and couldn't handle the relentless hours and high demands. Not only that, they are very book smart but not hands on smart. They have a lot of trouble applying the knowledge in a real way.
On the other hand, some not all tech's (apprenticeship if you want to label it) have learned the system by working hard and have done well therefore, moving up, but only so far. It works both ways, you need some advanced education to understand the reasoning behind the process but you have to be able to apply it in a real way for it to matter. IMO, in today's workforce a degree will get your resume a second look and possible hire. A PHD will get you more money than a MS and certainly more than someone with only a high school degree.
Just look at what is happening with the job market today. We have a huge number of unemployed. Let just say 25% are recent college grads, 25% have only a high school degree, 25% have less than ten years experience, and 25% have more than 15 years experience. For the good jobs available today, most employer's are going to eliminate the high school and under ten year resume's right away because either they don't have a degree or needing too high a salary (too much student loan debt). That leaves the RCG's and the over 15 years experience left. These people are hungry for their first or last job. They realize they can't be picky and can't expect to make a huge salary. Will the employer hire someone they want to take the time to train or someone who already has the training and needs less supervision? Neither, they hire from within and promote a co-worker to help them earn more money. Sounds like a bad joke, but it's true.
Until we get the economy going again, none of this discussion about degree's or not will matter. However, the original discussion is very relevant. Home schooled Gen Z kid's will have a huge impact in the next few decades. Their impact will be like moving away from the horse and buggy to automobiles. Keep up Gen X & Yer's.
Posted by Kim on January 19, 2012 at 1:23 pm | permalink |
Hello,
There is a boy on my street who plays with my son. they are both 12 and my son goes to public school and this boy is homeschooled. This boy is being schooled when he feels like it. If he does not feel like doing any work he does not. So, this child reads at a first grade level, can barely do single digit multiplication, has no idea the months of the year, does not know when his birthday is, has no idea what the equator is. He is very curious, and bright. I work in mental health and I see no signs of impairment there, but who knows. I cannot figure out if this is okay or not? He plays computer games all day long, he is not allowed outside during sun hours because his mother wont let him put chemicals on his body. He does not use soap for the same reason. My son is very kind to him, but this poor kid is very odd, and most kids call him weird and do not want him around. I wonder if this kind of teaching will work. What do you think? My son is always asking me why this kid doesnt know this or that of a normal 6th grader. I do not have an answer.
Posted by Anonymous on February 7, 2012 at 1:59 pm | permalink |
In my humble opinion as a homeschooling mom, that is not the norm for homeschooling and I would say it borders on abuse. Very sad.
Posted by Melinda on February 8, 2012 at 9:46 am | permalink |
I just want to say as a homeschooling mom who was college educated, that going to college is about SO MUCH MORE than getting a job. If you just want to land a job after college, go to vocational or trade school of some kind. Going to college is about becoming an educated person. Attaining greater understanding about the world, ideas, culture, history. Absorbing the knowledge of skilled professors, being able to think critically about the ideas you are presented with there, and articulate your own ideas clearly. You can be very skilled and get a job that provides food for your table and a roof over your head. You can even become so specialized that your skill is highly sought after and you have great material wealth. But is that the only definition of success? Lucrative job and money? If you have no education beyond your chosen trade, you are handicapped. Having a broad understanding of arts, literature, science, history, the beauty of math, cultures, politics is what makes a person truly well-rounded and able to contribute to the world. God forbid our homeschooling efforts produce a generation of kids that think success is only doing their own thing however they want to do it. I want my children to be life-long lovers of learning, eager to receive from the world as well as give back to it. Able to make their own opportunities if necessary, but equally able to enjoy, participate and lead in the world at large as it already exists.
Posted by Melinda on February 8, 2012 at 9:43 am | permalink |