Homeschooling: The History and Philosophy of a Controversial Practice

by James G. Dwyer, Shawn F. Peters

In The History and Philosophy of a Controversial Practice , James G. Dwyer and Shawn F. Peters examine homeschooling’s history, its methods, and the fundamental questions at the root of the heated debate over whether and how the state should oversee and regulate it. The authors trace the evolution of homeschooling and the law relating to it from before America’s founding to the present day. In the process they analyze the many arguments made for and against it, and set them in the context of larger questions about school and education. They then tackle the question of regulation, and they do so within a rigorous moral framework, one that is constructed from a clear-eyed assessment of what rights and duties children, parents, and the state each possess. Viewing the question through that lens allows Dwyer and Peters to even-handedly evaluate the competing arguments and ultimately generate policy prescriptions. Homeschooling is the definitive study of a vexed question, one that ultimately affects all citizens, regardless of their educational background.
 

Genres: Education, History, Nonfiction

256 pages, Paperback

Published April 15, 2019

Reviews

[Oliver Bateman]

The first half of the book, covering the history of homeschooling, is perfectly serviceable education history.

The second part, which purports to be some philosophical/regulatory approach to the "practice" of homeschooling, is repetitive, overly long (not because the book is long - it's fairly short - but because they're saying a whole lot of nothing over and over). There, you learn that because homeschooling is so poorly regulated in most states, states should attempt to regulate it a bit more, with things like "portfolio review" by "experts." Sure, ok. The notion of providing voucher funds for homeschool families - as is the case in a handful of states - isn't a bad one, but it's really just a way to keep these families on the grid.

As a homeschool "alum" - I "attended" from grades 2 through 10, covering eight grades in five years - I'm skeptical of all this nonsense. My experience was quite different (read about it here: https://thespectator.com/topic/homesc...), with a mother who worked full time in the public schools as a teacher/administrator and a car dealer father who brought me to work with him and let me design his ads, enter his invoices, &c., but it was far superior to what I encountered in grades 11-12 or most of undergrad (with a few quality profs standing out as exceptions).

But who cares if most homeschools are "bad?" So are most public schools, most private schools, most colleges, etc. Why is this? Because most students, families, and teachers are bad and nobody has enough time or resources to do anything right. With that in mind, I say let 'er rip, Dwyer and Peters be darned. Most regulation is done by such ill-equipped or outright lazy people (so are most jobs) that you're just adding a layer of crap atop something that already sucks and blows. Job creation, I suppose. So it goes.

[Becky]

This was the best academic history of homeschooling I read. It doesn't spend so much time on "so what do homeschoolers do all day?" Like some of the earlier works.

[Ietrio]

The current text is the politically correct version of a simple truth:

> You are chattel slaves. Everything you make will come first to your owner, and your owner will rightfully decide how much of your pay should go to you, and how much should he, your master, allot for the common good: his mansion, his guards, the roads on which his carts drive the product of your work to the market, the hospitals in which he will treat his faithful slaves, and the prisons in which he will lock up those who don't obey his trusted representatives. Your children are his property, and only he should decide what happens to the children.

[Rebecca H.]

Read my review in an upcoming issue of Choice Reviews for Academic Libraries.

[Eliana Lazzara]

i remain anti homeschooling!!