Saturday, April 29, 2006

  • The very interesting question of what it means for a student to be properly "socialized"

    Currently Listening
    Strength
    By The Alarm
    "The Day the Ravens Left the Tower"
    see related

    In response to my introductory set of questions i got several interesting responses, and i'd like to address one of these now.  

    In this post i'm somewhat guilty of putting the cart before the horse, in that i'm going to address an issue that probably ought to wait until about ten foundational issues have been addressed first.  But i've had a reader response that sets my thought process spinning in a particular direction and i want to go with it.  Look for a more systematic treatment of the subject of education beginning, hopefully, in my next post.

    The reader in question (RachelStarr) agreed with my use of the term "conformist monstrosities" in reference to the kinds of kids who are so often churned out of the public institutions.  She observed that if you're going to throw a puppy to the wolves, it will either get eaten or it will become a wolf.  And this is exactly the appropriate response to one of the most commonly articulated arguments against home education.  That argument is, of course, that kids need to be "socialized"--that is, they need to learn to fit into society--and that this is best achieved by immersing them in an institutional setting where they will be surrounded by dozens, or hundreds, of other kids their own age.

    Oh my word!  What a silly idea.  It is not logical, it is not borne out by experience, common sense revolts against it, and it's absolutely the last thing that the Word of God would advocate. 

    This idea--that all children ought to be hurled into large institutions where they are surrounded by masses of other children--would not have been taken seriously by anyone prior to the modern period.  It only sounds convincing to people who are already accustomed to the large-scale institutionalization of children and have learned to view it as normal.  Such an idea would have seemed a perversion to someone who lived prior to the revolutionary era of the late-1700's and early 1800's.  It is in our own era of impersonal institutions and collectivization that such an idea is able to seem anything other than a disturbing nightmare.

    Let's take apart the idea that "socialization" is one of the primary purposes of a child's education, and that this socializing process needs to take place among crowds of kids.

    Objection #1.  Parents, family members and other mature adults are much better equipped to train a student in sound, mature patterns of behavior than are mobs of 12-year-olds.

    Come on.  Seriously.  Think about it.  If we hadn't all grown up with the idea of throwing hundreds of kids together in large institutions, can you imagine a parent saying to himself, "Hmmm.  I want little Biffy to be a well-adjusted child who is going to grow into a mature adult of substantial and sound character.  How may i best accomplish this?  [Scratches beard for a minute.]  I've got it!  I'll immerse him in a tide of other children his own age, so that he may pick up their habits, their speech patterns, their values and their perspective on reality."  Only the rare and particularly idiotic parent would have drawn this conclusion before the advent of widespread public education.  (And by "public" i simply mean education involving large groups of people and conducted out in the marketplace of society, rather than in the security of the home or perhaps a cozy, small-scale church environment.  These criticisms apply in almost equal measure to the government-run schools and to most of the privately-operated ones.)

    Far superior would be the solution of training little Biffy to model his behavior after that of his parents and other adult relatives, and their friends and spiritual associates. 

    Sure, there are lots of bad eggs out there who are not the best role models for their children.  But you know what?  They are the parents that God has given to those kids, and by and large, the adult population of our country, as screwed up as they are, make up a much more reasonable body of persons from which the young may learn how to be mature, than are the other kids their own age.  You don't learn how to grow up by imitating ten-year-olds.  And it must be added that one of the major reasons why the adult population of our country are so messed up is that they, themselves, are the products of a public, institutionalized system of education that's been in place for over a century.

    Objection #2. The "socialization" that most school-children learn involves a retardation of the maturing process, a terrible self-concept, a complex of insecurities and neuroses, an addiction to shallow and grotesque popular culture, a reduction of vocablulary and acquisition of weak, slangy speech patterns, an inability to communicate clearly and articulately, a loss of the ability to think rationally, an incapacity to interact comfortably with adults, a tendency toward coarseness, rudeness and disrespect for authority figures, and an almost overwhelming tendency toward the breakdown of moral thought and intuition.  I do not think this is the sort of society that anyone ought to be advocating. 

    I have not even mentioned the specific dangers that many parents fear: the violence in schools, often involving weapons, the widespread expression of sexuality in appearance, innuendo, speech patterns and physical indulgence, the tendency to pick up naughty language and other habits such as smoking, drinking and the use of illegal drugs.  As dangerous as these things are, i do not see them as the primary reasons why one should look askance at institutional education.  Granted, these things do constitute strong reasons for keeping a student out of a poisonous environment.  My point is simply that they, obvious objections though they be, are not the strongest reasons.  There are worse demons than drugs and violence lurking in those halls.

    It is not the isolated incidents involving knife-fights, drug use and girls getting pregnant that make the schools a terrible place to be.  The point is that the entire school environment is one which encourages dissoluteness of moral and intellectual fiber, and which inhibits the maturing process.  I have to add this: these criticisms are true of most private schools as well, whether "Christian" or no.  A crowd of thirteen-year-olds is a crowd of thirteen-year-olds.  I don't care whether the school claims to be "Christian" or not, i'm not going to immerse my own children (when i have them) in such an environment.

    Objection #3.  Contrary to the argument used against home-educators, "socialization" is not part of the purpose of an education. 

    Kids become "socialized" simply through participation in healthy relationships with adults and with other healthy kids their own age.  The collectivized education mills are not the place to find healthy kids, and the kids who have been damaged by immersion in that environment are not generally going to be a good influence on anyone else's kids.  The whole setting just breeds immaturity, unreason and dissoluteness.

    "Socialization" is a product of relationship, not education, and genuine relationship is the one thing that many kids in the public institutions never learn how to engender.

    These three objections to the idea of education-as-socialization ought not even to require articulation.  They really are kind of obvious.  The point bears repeating:  the reason why we are even open to this kind of thinking is that such a system of education was foisted on us as children, and on our parents and grandparents as well.  We tend to accept as normal the things we've grown up with, whether they actually make sense or not.

    There is a disturbing "Christian" version of the socialization argument.  This is the idea that Christian young people ought to be placed in godless environments so that they can be a good influence and win some of their classmates to Christ. 

    How absurd!  This is no more the purpose of education than "socialization" is.  Education's purpose is to train and equip the student in such a way that, when he does enter the larger social context, he will be qualified to set an example and share the gospel with people.  This role ought never to be assigned to children of elementary and middle school age, and only the rare high school student is prepared for it.  I would venture to guess that at least half of the adults in our evangelical churches have not qualified themselves to be a strong witness in a godless culture.  It is a shameful misapprehension of what education is for, to view it as a setting in which we use our little children as shock troops against the kingdom of darkness.  If you have ever done this to your kids:  Shame on you.  When they become adults, if they have been properly educated, then they will be able to take their places upon the field of battle against the kingdom of darkness.  Children who have been cast into institutional schools from an early age rarely become strong enough in the faith to take on this role, even as adults.  By hurling them onto the battlefield before they were ready, you have crippled them. 

    So:  If educational institutions are such a bad idea, how ought the poor tykes to receive their education--and, in the process, become properly "socialized"? 

    God has, of course, provided the ideal environment (or "institution," if you must use such language) for the maturing and acculturization of children.  It is the home.

    Families are the ideal environments for the "socialization" of children, in combination with vibrant networks of relationship and spiritual accountability.  The kinds of sound, strong children that are produced in such environments grow up to become sound, strong adults.  And honestly, guys--anyone who is reasonably bright can pick up fairly quickly the social and cultural patterns current among one's peer group, if such an acquisition is even necessary.  In truth, it's probably far better to be an individual endowed with the kinds of personal eccentricities that make people interesting.  A society made up of such people, each with his own unique landscape, would be a society well worth participating in, and participation in so rare a society would be a pleasure.

Comments (23)

  • rachelstarr
    Boy... and I figured I might get a return comment in reply to my rant :). Thanks for this; I shall reply in greater depth later, probably.
  • Nicodemus42
    This all sounds good in theory. However, what's your solution for the parents that must both work in order to keep a roof over their collective heads? There are many poor to middle class people who would be living on the welfare system if both parents did not work. I would love to be a stay at home mom and aviod public school. However, I think it's more important for my child to have a roof over her head, clothes on her back, and food in her belly. That's our economic reality. If you can afford to stay at home to educate your future children, I think that's wonderful. But, what's the solution for those of us who can't afford such an idea?
  • Moredhel
    pay people like Mr. Bird to teach us! (i'd know... i'm in that situation.) both of my parents work... i'm homeschooled. but i'll let Mr. Bird respond instead of me... it being his topic.
  • rachelstarr
    Aw shucks... 'tweren't hardly nothing...
  • jvalle
    that song on my site is "middle of no where" by hot hot heat. they are excellent.

    and this is a very long post. i will read it soon.
    :jess:
    ps. thanks for the happy birthday :o)
  • rachelstarr
    When I was only partway through this post I thought to myself, "Yes, but our society is already so damaged by adults whose maturity has been stunted; whose ability to think and reason and live a healthy life has been handicapped, that I fear there may not be a simple way out." Of course you addressed that issue yourself later on. I'm grateful both for the flexibility of human nature (growth can begin again, even if it has been long hindered) and for the reality of God's redemptive power.
  • gop_christian

    Nicodemus42, 

    I think Mr. Bird answered gave the solution to your dilemna in the second point of his previous essay.  He thinks it's totally unnecessary for your child to get an education.  You can just ignore the issue for the next 15 years or so and no harm will be done.

    Here's what that second point had to say:
    2. What if we just left the poor kid alone and let him enjoy his first decade or decade and a half of life... what would be the harm done?  Or what if we simply put him to work during the time when most children are embarked on their formal education?  What purpose can there possibly be for monopolizing half of the child's life and turning it inside out (and seriously rearranging the parents' lives, as well) in order to introduce something called an education into Little Biffy's experience?
  • JACOBOOK
    Hi,How are you?  I have often thought on this subject but because I posses the typing capacity of a 3 year old I may have. to shorten my thoughts abit.:) It  seems there are 2 types of eduation,one of wich is objective and the other wich is culturally subjective. The first of course,wich,those of us who are Christians beleive to  be the most important is as Proverbs said to" Raise a child in the way he should go and when he is old he will not depart from it." . So fo rthe sake of a really corny analogy, I suppose I will call this Gospel ed 101. I would venture to say that even if a child grows up without  the ability to read or write,with no formal education whatsoever, if he  has Christ then that is more than enough. Now, that doesnt mean I am anti scholastic education, although the emphasis that society in general has placed on its signifigance, I do not agree with.   All throughout history  even in alot of eastern countries today, it was and is beleived that,  the success or failure of a child was a direct reflection on  the personal signifigance of  his or her family.  Basically,If they did not receive some sort of education,  both the child and there families were considered at large, to be invalids. Although this beleif, is still held by alot of people in the West, I still think it is a bit harder for us to comprehend, because we now live in such an individualistic, impersonal society.  Today we live in a cuture where  education has been reduced to a mechanical  process adamently, focused on the goal of success,wealth,and overacheivement..Whatever the dominant veiw of the culture  becomes the goal for wich it strives. Those of us who live in the United States most likley agree, that we our a very rich boisterous and materialistic society.  In general I am speaking about the philosophy adapted by the majority no t the whole. There are many wonderful schools and even more than that wonderful parents who home sch.ool their children and  along with formal educaiton teach them the universal lesson of the love of christ wich surpases understanding:)  The reason I keep refering to the Gospel in what seems to be a discourse on education,is because the 2 concepts are inseperable ( to educate in the fullest meaning of the word is to educate the mind as well as the soul.     
  • JACOBOOK

     ill have to finish this post a bit later , I wasnt sure how to save what I wrote so I just submitted it. :)
  • JACOBOOK
    The popular veiw of secular education is to epuip the child with the skills that are neccessary to grow up and graduate college,and begin working in their desired field. To impose such values as morlality or philosophy of life etc etc is not veiwed as relevant in the least to the idea of education. I said earlier that the goal of education is to educate the mind as well as the soul but this is quite idealistic. If someone where to try to teach anything to students other than the specified doctrine of the school system,they would be dismissed immediatly. I mean imagine the outrage,if a science teacher told the students evolution was wrong and then taught creationism instead,or if a history teacher,said the history books were mostly false information numbed down to such a degree as to be hardly historically accurate, or if like that great scene in dead poets society, The teacher stood on his desk and ripped pages out of the intro to poetry book, and then told his students to seize the day! Anything that cultivates a greater appreciation of beauty or truth in the soul of the individual student is heavily frowned upon. Again another example from dead poets society. ' THE PASSION OF THE TEACHER, THE DEPTH OF HIS CONVICTIONS ABOUT WHAT HE TAUGHT WAS THE SOLE MOTIVATION FOR THE PASSION OF HIS STUDENTS. If he acted in accordance with the mandates of our school system,the name of the movie would have been (students who are bored in poetry class society)or the irrelvant society:) In an idealistic society the basis for education would be built upon the foundation of Love. I would venture to say that if there were enough teachers out there who were willing to veiw there position not as a job but a ministry then the number of students who drop out of school or have no intrest in what is being taught would drop dramatically! I mean ,I went on to Major in Art because of my 8th grade art teacher,and I can remember teachers who,just because I knew they cared about me, I wouldnt sleep in class or skip it. the capability of the Gospel and the humans who love one another ability to revolutionize not only the school system but the world is incredible. Sadly enough the majority do not beleive this, but its like Plato said"like man like government: or in this case like man like school system". I was probably all over the board here,but I dont really organize thoughts well,so I hope this post makes sense to someone. Anyways have a good day
  • Mermish

    Excellent points, Nicodemus42 and JACOBOOK.  "The reason I keep refering to the Gospel in what seems to be a discourse on education,is because the 2 concepts are inseperable: to educate in the fullest meaning of the word is to educate the mind as well as the soul."  Both are essential.  Herr Professor, you seem to be implying that it is advisable for a child to have the 'soul-education' from day one, but no 'mind-education,' or specific, detailed information assimilation, until the age of, say, 15.  Surely basic information for communication and service in this world, be it mathematics, reading, or foreign language, is better assimilated before the age of 15.  Having been home-schooled since day one, and in this way recieving an education in its full sense, I can attest to the truth in the home-schooling philosophy as acted upon by my parents and articulated by NonNobis.  My desire is to home-school my own children, if and when I am so blessed.  I am aware of the breadth of different family situations, and the different vehicles in which God works.  The principle of educating the whole child is, I think, an essential that can be incorporated into all of them.  I would encourage parents to seriously consider the issues at stake, and to seek God's heart for how best to educate their children.  For some, deleting an institutional school's tuition can make one source of income more feasible.  For my family, my mom's scrap-booking home business is a helpful supplement.  As my brothers and I have gotten older, we have been able to pursue more and more studies on our own.  But make no mistake: home-schooling means lifestyle changes; it means tremendous sacrifices of time and energy.   Bottom line:  I believe God will honor our pursuit for His good, pleasing and perfect will, especially for His gift of our children.
  • notweary

    I think this post is excellent. I would like to address the subject of not being able to afford to stay home. I think, for one thing, a lot more women can "afford" to stay home than think they can. Often it is a matter of standard of living. Our kids have done with less "stuff" than other kids have....be it quantities of lessons (skiing, skating, etc), family vacations, brand new designer clothes, and what have you. We've purchased nice clothes at thrift stores and economized other ways. When you take off what the working mom is paying in taxes, working wardrobe, convenience foods, childcare, etc...she is not left with that much.

    I also have to say that even if the finances are that tight.....the first question to be asked is "Does God want me to stay home and educate my child? 'Cause if He does, then He will provide. I am not the only mom who can say that my husband's and my conviction was that I should stay home. We did not look at it from a financial point of view. Through our 25 years of having children, my husband has had various jobs and even seasons of unemployment without any unemployment insurance. (I don't know if Unempolyment Insurance is only a Canadian thing). God has provided. Always. Our children have always had a roof over their head and food to eat and clothes to wear. This is God's provision. Over the years, when people find out I'm a stay-at-home mom, they have remarked "Your husband must have a good job!? and similar things. Often I have just smiled inwardly, as that hasn't often been the case. My children have learned that God DOES provide.

    And in terms of a providing....my children have actually had God provide for things like braces, and sometimes music lessons and other extras.....when it was God who was prompting, then they have had these things. He even gave us a very special "family vacation" for two nights in a special hotel.....his gifts are bountiful as these aren't things that we could afford on my husbands earnings.
  • inaframe
    hi :) none of my artwork is for sale anywhere or shown anywhere but if you like something let me know. a friend is helping me have prints made of my paintings :)

    e

    oh and thank you for your comment. i'm sorry it took til today for me to see it.
    God bless!
  • inaframe
    art history. :)
  • notweary
    Re. your question on my blogsite: yes, I "discovered" you via the Thomson blogring....now and then I read blogs of people whom I don't personally know, and this post definitely struck a strong chord in me.
  • thispictureofmyheart
    i'm not sure if it's on that. but yeah i konw the meaning and i love it. whenever we sing that song for a concert our director explains the meaning of it ^_^

    your post looks very intrigiung and i shall hopefully read it soon but as of right now i'm not awake enough to comprehend too much i'm sorry.
  • narellew

    Ok, so I may be in the unique position of having experience in teaching and participating in the 3 rounds of education here: 1. attended public school up 'til the age of 10, had 3 out of 4 of my children attend public school for a couple of years.  2.  started private christian all girls school at the age of 11 - 17, now have all 4 girls at private co-ed christian school  3.  I was a governess for a year and a bit at a place called Cunnamulla on a 40 000 hect sheep property where I taught from correspondence papers.

    Both the correspondence schooling and Christian Ed each have many benefits.  The public, while there are good schools, bad schools and many varied levels in between, I found that the correspondance gave me the ability to identify any problems that my students were having, and having the extent of help that I had (school of the air, itinerate teachers, correspondence teacher etc which I know to the same extent home-schoolers don't have)  I had a wonderful experience with teaching and my students did well also.

    With the Christian schooling that my girls now have, I feel extroadinarily blessed for my girls to have a truly faith filled school to call their own.  I also work at the school as an assistant in the numeracy and literacy program for years prep - 3, and in the art department as well as working in the day care area for after school care and on call for the babies - kindy aged rooms; so I have contact with most of the young people who attend.  Where you have mentioned that, in my words, there is a flock mentality to the public schools as far as morals etc are concerned, I have found the youngans, and especially teen's being drawn to that need for belonging, which basically is what we are talking about, it has been a wonderful plus for our girls and other members who have gone through the school.  These children, have learnt to belong to Christ by the Godly influence of their peers, teachers, youth workers and the many and varied visitors that have been invited to the school.  There is also a  retirement village and aged hostel/ nursing home attached to the school grounds.  Many children have grandparents, and teachers parents at the  facility. Soooooo, there is possability for children to come into contact with the elderly as they make their way to the tuckshop to buy their milk and the kids their lunches.  There's on old dear that drives her buggy around with a parrot on her shoulder.  She likes to take him for his daily 'walk'.

    The worst thing that has happened in our school to this point is that some of the seniors were wearing the wrong school shoes (shocking, i know - whip 'em I say; where's the gallows when you need them!).......if you don't include the grade 8 ADDer boy who wondered a bit too long about how hard you would have to press on the fire alarm glass to get it to go off - he found out the hard way!  (Oh yeah, did i mention that our school believes in corporal punishment as a method of discipline for the primary schoolers?  Not too sure about the highschoolers as I haven't heard of any need in the 4 years that we have been there.  All is done out of love and the primary priciples are more like grand parents than....well.....principles. Actually, I won't mention it as it could cause many of you good people to be side-tracked)  Now where was I?  O yeah, you see the flock mentality can also be a blessing.  IT DEPENDS ON WHOSE MORALS AND BELIEF SYSTEMS YOU ARE WORKING BY AND HOW FAR YOU ARE WILLING TO TAKE THEM.  These kids are no-where near boring; nor bored!  They rebel in their own way, but there is hardly a swear word to be heard and they are tolerent of others differences. Unless you haven't guessed - I love this school!!!!!  I could go on, but I won't.........yes, I can hear your collective sigh from Australia!!!!

    Public schools - not quite up to your standards over there, though I know that we only hear of the bad institutions.  Still, not good.

    There is one thing that you are missing out on here, David.  That's the influence of the Americanised TV shows and teen movies (oh yeah, thanks guys!) and the usual typecast characters that are portrayed on them, that have such great influence on the youth.  Not to mention the magazines that they are told they need to be 'normal' and the so-called music that is  being pumped into their heads most of the day.  Also, not every family would be blessed by homeschooling.  What do you say to a child who's parents give them $50 and tell them to go away for the weekend so that the parents can shoot up all weekend - you know, to unwind!  I don't think that these children are in a place of safe influence, where they have positive influences. Where do these kids go?  Even the ones who's parents aren't drugged out, yet who's parents are unable to organise themselves out of a box, let alone organise a day of teaching their children.  Out bush, I know there was mention also of parents who couldn't teach their children properly, so they did the work and sent it in.  What kind of watch-dog are you going to put on this?  Hmmmmmmmm?
  • narellew
    Oh my - an evitable novel!!!!
  • HopeofGlory1968

    My long-overdue thoughts:

    1) My heart has broken over way too many precious puppies in my life who indeed have become wolves, due almost entirely to the elements in the public education environment that you detail under Objection #2.  "He who walks with the wise becomes wise, but a companion of fools suffers harm," and "Foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child." 

    2) While Christian schools can be immensely better than public schools in some respects (in many cases, the curriculum truly imparts a biblical worldview, the staff are Spirit-empowered believers pouring their lives into evangelizing and discipling the children, and these schools are far-watered-down in the intensity of unchecked depravity that is allowed expression, in comparison to today's public school jungle of immorality) --- I agree that these school suffer from the same debilitating flaw of tremendously detrimental peer influence.

    3) I believe the Church needs to meet the need of those, like single parent families and other low-income families, who cannot afford to home school their own children. It is time that we get serious and counter-cultural about true biblical community:  in this regard, either through funding such parents to stay at home to educate their children, or through enfolding these children into other homeschooling environments.

    4)  Not being in the education field, two questions come to mind --- which may or may not merit public address:

    a)  How did we get here? What brought on the advent of widespread public institutionalized education over a century ago?  What was considered deficient in the prior means of education, that this even happened?

    b) What are Christian educators thinking these days in regard to a serious attempt to change the educational landscape, at least among the Church if not eventually the wider culture?  I know there is a healthy and I believe growing homeschooling movement in our country, but is anyone talking about a strategy on a wider scale?  What are the best homeschooling thinkers out there proposing to make a greater impact among the Church in our nation, that we could save more of our puppies from the tragic destiny of wolfdom?  And in fact, not only for their protection, but to raise them up for a radical counter-influence of our wolfish culture?  What do you propose?

    Don't let me derail you, Herr Professor.  But I'd be interested if you would address these questions as your manifesto unfolds.
  • HopeofGlory1968

    Herr Professor,

    This is to serve you notice of my intent to coordinate a worldwide boycott of your other blogs until you submit something fresh to this one. 

    I mean, there you are, investing your life in penning bizarre tales and misogynist commentary, while the whole world languishes in the Evil Clutches of Institutionalized Education, waiting desperately for you to map out for us the battle plan for a glorious revolution in Christian education, for the raising up of a mighty army of culturally astute spiritual warriors.

    Our eyes are glued to the skies, as we fan the last embers of hope that you will yet swoop in and save the day... Come to our rescue! 

    I know you won't disappoint us. Please consider my humble plea:  Give us the next installment of your some-day-historic educational philosophy manifesto.  Thank you.

    ( I hope you are appreciating how hard I work to inspire you toward the fulfillment of your life's purpose. )
  • communismisforlosers

    Hey :)

    I would love to get together this fall, yes.  Things are getting busier and crazier for me as I get sucked into college and piano and just life in general, and I need time to sit back and think and talk.  I'll talk to you when you're back here and we'll work something out.

    Thanks so much for your kindness and encouragement; it means a lot to me. 

  • Jael_Music

    I agree with the article, feel with parents who feel handicapped by finances or other issues and have a one word solution.  Faith.  God is our provider.  He will not let obedience go unsupported.

    I have lived what I speak.

    Love to all
    Jael
  • NonNobis2005

    The gentleman whose comment is featured just above this one (Jael) has raised or is raising twelve (i think) kids, the eldest of whom, now in their 20's and late teens, appear to have emerged from the experience as sound, godly women, intelligent, interesting and adequately nourished.  It is also my understanding that their family has gone through seasons of financial struggle, changes in living situation, and various combinations of income-producing ventures in their commitment to do things God's way.  The fruit of their sacrifices may be seen in the results in their eldest daughters' lives.  It seems to have been worth it.

  • Choose Identity

  • Give eProps (?)

  • Post a Comment

  • Say it with Minis! (?)

    • nuh-uh
      nuh-uh
    • Good morning
      Good morning
    • Dunk!
      Dunk!
    • I'm too hot to handle
      I'm too hot to handle