As any homeschooling parent can tell you, the most frequent question (or challenge) we encounter from other parents about our child’s education environment boils down to the dreaded S-word: Socialization. As in: “Kids who aren’t forced into social interactions with other children their same age can’t possibly be considered ’socialized.’”
Witness, for example, the kerfluffle that happened at Dean’s World when he agreed with me about the perils and pitfalls of public school attendance as the primary method of ’socializing’ kids. The one thing missing from the conversation at Dean’s was a single scrap of evidence that any ’socialization’ occurs through the public school system, much less that it’s inherently superior. To put it another way, a staggering number of people seem to believe that public school attendance is synonymous with socialization.
The circularity of the argument is nearly laughable when one recalls what socialization means.
socialization
(psychology) The process whereby a child learns to get along with and to behave similarly to other people in the group, largely through imitation as well as group pressure.
Suffice it to say, then, that both homeschooled children and their public schooled counterparts are ALL socialized. The question is: to conform to whom? Homeschooling parents, myself included, believe that the greatest gift we can give our children is a personal role model, a functional home, a family that stands behind them in their own pursuit of excellence, and an education consistent with the morals that we claim.
And that, Ladies and Gentlemen, is what alarms those who believe children should be sent to public school so they can be socialized. They fear Johnny will be warped because his parents — who do not believe in evolution, for example — choose not to make that part of Johnny’s science curriculum. They cloak it in concern whether Johnny will know how to get along with other runny-nosed children his age, whether he’ll know what it’s like to be picked last for a team, whether he’ll be prepared to ask a girl on a date some day long down the road or if he’ll crumble the first time his boss passes him over for a promotion (assuming he can even get a job, being homeschooled and all).
But what they really, really mean is this: they don’t share the same morals as Johnny’s parents. They want Johnny to learn what they themselves believe, and they wrap it up in a nice, neat little package they call ’socialization.’ Or, as Freeven noted in the comments:
The socialization argument is a canard. Public schools can’t be defended on the academic merits, so they have to look elsewhere for talking points. These things get parroted around, but ask for any hard evidence and the discussion is pretty much over.
Interesting, isn’t it? Non-homeschoolers do not believe that parents should have the right to independently educate their own children in a manner consistent with their family’s moral beliefs if they don’t share those beliefs themselves.
Frankly, I don’t call that ’socialization,’ although I do agree it smacks of a different dreaded ’s-word.’
UPDATE: Anwyn’s trying to decipher the comments of a Montessori advocate who, while remarking on the “positive social effects” of that approach notes: “Typically the home environment overwhelms all other influences in that area.” While I, being jaded, interpret that remark as yet another educator who believes that schools are inherently superior to a child’s actual parents, Anwyn’s taking a proactive approach and actually emailing the ‘expert.’