Myth: Home-schooling delivers inferior academic outcomes for children, compared to conventional schooling
There is now substantial evidence overseas that home-school students are succeeding academically. A comprehensive US study by Lawrence M. Rudner of 20,760 home-schooled students in 1998, using the Iowa Test of Basic Skills, demonstrated that these students out-scored their school counterparts in every subject and at every grade level by as much as 41 percentile points.
In a 1997 study Brian Ray, from the National Home Education Research Institute, showed that the academic achievement levels for home-schooled students, on average, was significantly above that of government school students in the areas of language, reading and mathematics.
Advertisement
There are also some individual examples which demonstrate the levels of academic excellence attained by students taught at home. Home-schoolers were placed in the top three in the 2000 US National Spelling Bee. A home-schooler, Christopher Paolini, wrote a bestselling novel, Eragon, at the age of 15. Prestigious American universities such as Harvard, Yale and Princeton select home-schooled students on the basis of test scores and a portfolio of work.
Myth: Home-schooling deprives children of attaining socialisation skills that are available only in conventional school settings
Contrary to conventional expectations, those children who are home-schooled also tend to enjoy significant levels of social interaction outside home and school. Michael Farris in the Wall Street Journal, March 5, 1997, found 98 per cent of home-schooled students are involved in two or more “outside the home” activities each week, and William Mattox in USA Today, February 3, 1999, showed the average home-schooled student is regularly involved in more than five social activities including afternoon and weekend sport, music, neighbourhood play, church groups, part-time employment and voluntary work.
There is also evidence to suggest that home-schooled students are not impeded in terms of their emotional development. In studying actual behaviour of children, a famous 1992 study by Larry Shyers found home-schooled children in the US demonstrated significantly higher self-esteem ratings than their conventionally schooled peers, and that these children had consistently fewer behavioural problems. Linda Montgomery found in her 1989 study that home-schooled students tended to show higher levels of leadership skills than their schooled counterparts.
Myth: Home-schooled children are more physically at risk than children in conventional schools
It is certainly not at all clear that home-schooling increases the likelihood that various forms of child abuse will materialise within the home. Indeed, there is no evidence, reputable research or judicial data that supports this proposition. Matters of abuse and neglect are covered by the relevant state and territory child protection legislation, and in the absence of credible information suggesting otherwise, there should be a presumption that home-schooling parents are as committed to providing the requisite love and care for their children as in other families. Home-schooling is a conscious choice of parents. It entails significant investments of time, energy and family resources and so it would appear unlikely that the average home-schooling family would engage in actions that would jeopardise the educational development of children.
Advertisement
Clearly, international research cannot be directly applied to the Australian context. However, it does nonetheless provide some evidence of the positive educational and social outcomes of home-schooling for children.
State and territory regulation of home-schooling
In a school education environment where government and non-government schools predominate, home-schooling represents the ultimate manifestation of freedom, privatisation and parental power in education. Home-schools provide the greatest potential to provide education, which is adaptable and responsive to its consumers, and acknowledges the rightful position of parents as the primary providers of education for their own children.
In previous editions of On Line Opinion, I have illustrated the detrimental implications for school choice that arise from the dual (and contradictory) role of state and territory governments. On the one hand they are owners and operators of government school systems. On the other they are funding providers and growth regulators for non-government schools and other educational providers.
Discuss in our Forums
See what other readers are saying about this article!
Click here to read & post comments.
16 posts so far.