The science behind learning styles

According to Learning Styles, Concepts and Evicence, a study [pdf] published in the journal Psychological Science in the Public Interest, that whole learning styles thing may not be all we think it is.  Sure, it seems to form the basis for many a text both for public school teachers and homeschoolers, but what is the basis for it?

Although the literature on learning styles is enormous, very few studies have even used an experimental methodology capable of testing the validity of learning styles applied to education.  Moreover, of those that did use an appropriate method, several found results that flatly contradict the popular meshing hypothesis.  Learning Styles, Concepts and Evidence

Rather than hard science, the movement has its origins in the more touchy-feely self-esteem movement of the 70s. And while their study in no way disproves that learning styles exist nor even that teaching in a child’s preferred modality may be beneficial, they argue rather strongly that we are spending a lot of time and money on something with very little scientific evidence behind it.

If education is to be transformed into an evidence-based field, it is important not only to identify teaching techniques that have experimental support but also to identify widely held beliefs that affect the choices made by educational practitioners but that lack empirical support.  Ibid.

Transforming education into an evidence-based field

And that’s where the researchers begin to lose me.  I am all for effective classrooms, but I’m not so sure we want education to become an evidence-based field.  I’m not sure we want to view teaching as data delivery, learning as data acquisition and testing as the measurable difference between the two.

I’m not sure we want education reduced to what can be tested in a multiple-choice format.

There is so much more to education.  It is about the whole child and how he is to be brought up.  It is about “enlightening the understanding, correcting the temper, forming the manners and habits of youth and fitting him for usefulness in his future station.”  Direct instruction and other behavior based programs may be empirically proven to improve math scores, but do they improve children?

How a child is taught is important, and not just for its ability to transfer the largest amount of data for the least amount of resources.  I may be going out on a limb here, but I’m guessing JJRoss’ decision to unschool, the Headmistress’ decision to use Charlotte Mason, Renae’s decision to use the Principle Approach, and The Mama’s decision to use a classical approach had little to do with which methodology would most efficiently lead to proficiency in any given subject.  Their decisions were based in what they believe about the nature of teaching and learning, and the role of the teacher and student.  As such, how we teach our children invariably communicates our beliefs about teaching and learning and the roles of teachers and students to our children.

How we learn affects how we think.  It affects our attitudes and beliefs about the very nature of human learning and the role we play in the construction of our own knowledge.

And this is why we must be careful of the so-called research-based classroom.  It carries with it its own definition of education that has been somewhat narrowly interpreted as high test scores.  I am all for assessing what we are doing in our classrooms and in our homes, but before we do this, we need to carefully define what we are looking for.  As The Core Knowledge Blog points out,

If we begin instead with a definition of education, then a curious thing may happen. The results will likely be better, yet they will not rule what we do. We will recognize that learning is for the long term as well as for the next day. We will recognize that some of the most difficult concepts and works last the longest in the mind. They may not translate immediately into results, yet they are unlikely to vanish. We will expect short-term results but teach beyond them.  There’s No Such Thing As Teaching

Discussing education as an evidence-based field restricts it to what is observable, measurable and testable.  It tells us what teaching methodologies produce good results on standardized tests such as the CAT or I-STEP.  It does not, however, tell us which methodologies produce thinkers, problem-solvers, artists, book-lovers, and teachers.  It does not tell us which methodologies support the child in setting and achieving their own goals, nor which help them to take responsibility for their own learning.

Are we really willing to let go of all that in the name of higher test scores?  Or do we want to hold on to the belief that education means just a little bit more than that?

Still, children need to learn to read, but I will continue with that thought in a future posting.

homeschool homeschooling education learning styles research based classroom

Like I mentioned yesterday, I will be watching President Obama’s speech to America’s school children with my children later today.  We have little ones around here, so we’ll be using the elementary lesson plans, legal or not. Actually, we’ll be focusing specifically on this question, because it fits perfectly with some ongoing conversations we have been having around here:

Why is it important that we listen to the president and other elected officials, like the mayor, senators, members of congress, or the governor? Why is what they say important?  Classroom Activities, Pre-K-6 (pdf)

I’ll let you know my children’s answers to that later, after I ask them, but here are mine:

I.  I’m Christian, and the bible is pretty clear:

Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake:  whether it be to the king, as supreme; or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.  For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men:  As free, and not using your liberty for a cloak of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.  –1Peter 2:13-16 (KJV)

I consider myself blessed to live in a nation whose ordinances allow me considerable liberty to express my disagreement with established authority, but I try very hard to apply this verse especially to my discussions:  “For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men…” By well doing hearts and minds are changed, not by inflammatory rhetoric.

II.  These are our elected leaders, and our responsibility as citizens is pretty clear.

The Salvation of the state is watchfulness in the citizen.  –Hartley Burr Alexander, inscribed on the Nebraska State Capitol Building

If we do not listen, we cannot know, and if we do not know, we cannot act.  Listening precedes all useful action, something I fear some may be forgetting.

Please share your thoughts on the prepared speech, the speech as it is delivered and the accompanying lesson plans.  If you had the stage, what would you tell America’s youth?  And what have you told your own children?

Obama school walkout education homeschooling

Update: The text of the speech is now available.  Is he seriously going to say “God bless you. God bless America”  to every student in America?

Tomorrow, President Obama will speak to the nation’s school children, presumably about setting education goals and staying in school.  At least that is what the White House is saying.

This is the first time an American president has spoken directly to the nation’s school children about persisting and succeeding in school. We encourage you to use this historic moment to help your students get focused and begin the school year strong.  Letter from Secretary Arne Duncan to Principals

This historic moment.  We are inviting students to become a part of history, much like when I was in school and the television cart was rolled in to watch the Challenger lift off.  I don’t know why I exactly stumbled over that part of Duncan’s letter to principals.  His job is PR for the program, but it still seems a bit over the top.  Even if George Bush, Sr. hadn’t done it almost 20 years ago.  The technology may be a bit different, but it appears that speech was about succeeding in school and was intended to address all students.

Both Bush’s went much further than Obama toward making our schools a national stage for federal education politics.  Granted, Obama wishes to go further still, but the course has already been charted.

For twenty years, we steadily shift the power in education from the local community toward the federal government, and do nothing but occasionally grumble.  The president makes a speech, however, and we call for a National Keep Your Child at Home Day.  Suddenly, we’re worried about brainwashing in a “totalitarian-type telecast” befitting “banana dictators.”

Compared to the power we have willingly handed over (even demanded to be taken from us), I must agree with Joanne Jacobs on this one.  What is so sinister?

It certainly isn’t because he’s black, so why the uproar?  Honestly, I think a lot of it has to do with something My Domestic Church quipped.

This president has used more prime time press conferences and informercials than any previous president.

Even liberal bloggers can see a bit of public relations overkill in the speech and its pre-game show.  Which brings us back to that word “historic” that made me choke on my coffee.  But there’s more to it than just that.

Read the post over at American Elephant.  How much of it really has to do with the speech?  Not much.  Instead, it is expressing general frustration over the direction the country is heading.  It is a direction we have very little control over individually, but we certainly can pull our kids out of school for one day.

One day.

Education has been moving toward national standards and centralized control for my entire life.  Finally, some people are standing up and saying “Enough.”  Unfortunately, it is an insignificant gesture aimed at an irrelevant event.

Incidentally, I do believe it is important to listen to the President so I’d like to invite you to discuss the speech here tomorrow.  We’ll be doing some warm up activities I’ll share here for discussion before viewing the video.  I have an appointment so will be watching it after the copy is made available, but feel free to share your thoughts!

education Obama speech My education, My future

Amy Platon of Scribble Ink Cafe had an article published in the Orlando Sentinel advsing homeschoolers to stick with the system.

I have much respect for parents who take matters into their own hands in an effort to protect their child. But when it comes to home-schooling, I’m worried about the big picture.

The “big picture” appears to consist of three main points:

1. I could never homeschool because he’d have to put up with me all day.
2. I don’t think I’m qualified.  Teachers are paid professionals.
3. He would never forgive me.

Number three is a decent argument and although I am a passionate homeschool advocate, I’d never tell anyone they had to homeschool.  Still, the basic premise of these first arguments is “because I don’t think homeschooling is for us, it isn’t for anyone.”

Then there are the “fear-based reasons.”

1. School-budget cuts.
2. Bad influences.
3. Insufficient education.

These don’t seem like fear-based reasons to me.  When a child is struggling in school, be it academically or socially, and programs they need to be successful are being cut, it is a parent’s right and duty to look out for the interests of their children.  That certainly does not always mean homeschooling.  There are a number of ways parents can become more involved in their local schools, many of which Amy lists.  But they do not always work.

Perhaps I should defer to someone who has chosen to homeschool for these very reasons.  Our decision was not based on the public schools and frankly I’d continue to homeschool even if the public schools had no problems…or if we could afford private school.  I homeschool because of what I believe about education:  namely that it involves the entire upbringing of a child, not some artificially segmented part of a child’s day.  Life and learning should be integrated and children should have the opportunity to become active members of their communities, not passive observers stuck in a classroom.

This is where some of Amy’s concerns seem based in ignorance. And I do not mean that in a negative way.  I had similar thoughts about homeschooling before I started.  I didn’t have enough contact with homeschoolers to form a valid framework for my thoughts about homeschooling.  Thus comes the question:

How can a home-schooled child have compassion for his community when he isn’t part of it?

That’s the thing–he is part of it.  My children experience community by playing catch in the backyard.  By participating in programs at the Y.  By going along with me to doctor’s appointments and on errands where they get to know our “community helpers” through frequent and informal contact rather than through a lesson delivered in kindergarten.  By stopping on the way home to watch the firemen wash their truck.  By volunteering.  By participating in community programs and events.

In short, the homeschooled child has a unique opportunity to truly be a part of their community rather than passively learn about their community.  Schools have often been viewed as “learning communities.”  But we, too, are part of a learning community.

One that extends beyond age ranges and grade levels.  To me, that is the bigger picture.

homeschooling homeschool home education

Responding to an earlier opinion column, Should evolution be taught in school?, Kalamazoo Gazette reader Lawrence Kapture throws out some thoughts on home education.

Homeschooling is essentially a protest movement. Regardless of motivation, homeschoolers believe public schools are unable to prepare their children to live in the world.  mlive.com

Perhaps for some.  Or perhaps it was at one time.  Or perhaps we are falsely perceived by a public who only hears from us when we are protesting a proposed law.

I am full of criticisms of public education, as are many of my fellow homeschoolers.  But then that is hardly unique to homeschoolers.  We didn’t write “Nation at Risk,” or “Why Johnny Can’t Read.”  Our measly 2% of the population hardly influenced President George Bush, Sr. to bill himself as “the education president.”  And I know his son wasn’t listening to us when he drafted No Child Left Behind.  Education has been a bit of a battle ground for some time, and homeschooling is only one (very small) part of that public conversation.

Being critical is not a protest movement.

Supporting reform is not a protest movement.

Choosing an alternative is not a protest movement.

It is only a protest movement if our decision to homeschool is directed at what is going on in public schools.  Like an organized boycott, a sit-in or march of some sort.  I can only speak for myself, but I did not choose to home educate because of what is going on in the public schools.  I chose to home educate because of the virtues inherent in this form of education.

Some people garden as an act of protest.  Most of us, however, just prefer the taste of homegrown produce or enjoy the hobby for its own rewards.  It is the same with home education.

Unfortunately, what homeschooling can do is isolate children from the market of ideas, especially when it comes to biological science. There is a large amount of fringe literature published by religious groups that support the claims of creationists while providing no real information about the vast field of evolutionary biology.  Ibid.

There is a large amount of fringe literature available on any topic imaginable and you don’t need to be a homeschooler to find it.  I do find it interesting that we’re talking about the “market of ideas” in public school, although by and large there is only one idea presented, taught and tested.  And that isn’t exclusive to the whole evolution debate.  There isn’t enough time to present anything like a marketplace of ideas with testing looming overhead, and all the baggage students bring with them to school.

And again, this isn’t about homeschooling.  We only account for approximately 2% of the population.  Yet according to a recent Gallup poll, only 39% of Americans say they believe in the theory of evolution, 25% do not and 36% don’t have an opinion.  Education was a factor in the beliefs, as was church attendance. Surprisingly, a poll in Britain revealed that only 25% of Briton’s thought the theory of evolution was “definitely true.”  This isn’t even an American issue.

If I were concerned about Americans’ lack of knowledge regarding Darwin and his theory, I would look first at why people are graduating high school…public high school…without this knowledge long before I’d jump on the homeschoolers.

Homeschooling allows families to isolate their children from good information by providing them only with information that is comfortable with their own biases.  Ibid.

The potential is there.  The potential is there anywhere someone has control over the curriculum.  Should that control come from the state or the parent?  What about when parents disagree?  What about when students disagree with the content that is being taught them?  One of the more interesting questions in one of my ethics courses dealt with this very debate.

The question was whether it was ethical to pass a student who demonstrated a knowledge of evolutionary theory that surpassed the course requirements, but who didn’t believe it.

There is a fundamental question about control here, but it isn’t about homeschooling.  We are just a bit of a catalyst for the discussion.

Like homeschooling is a protest against public schools, creationism is a protest against anything that opposes a literal interpretation of the Bible. When it comes to the origins of life, creationism is not a scientifically educated movement.  Ibid.

Kapture never supported his assertion that homeschooling is a protest movement against the schools, and now he’s claiming that creationsim is a protest as well.  It isn’t.  It is simply a belief.  One that existed prior to Darwin and prior to his predecessors who had already begun to look at the world outside a religious worldview.

Back in February, academics and scientists across Europe got together in Germany to discuss difficulties regarding the acceptance of evolution.  Some fear these lingering beliefs in creation are a danger to scientific thought in this country and the Western world in general.  I don’t exactly buy that, but our schools’ ability to graduate students who can scarcely read just might.

homeschool homeschooling creation evolution Darwin

It has been a long time since I’ve picked up a book that I could not put down.  Perhaps I should be a bit embarrassed by the fact that I finally relived that pleasure of a book read in a single sitting with a children’s book.  Or maybe not.  I have always loved quality children’s literature and its ability to express ideas with simplicity. . .and a bit of perspicuity not often found in books aimed at older audiences.

But The Wheel on the School starts off with an intriguing premise made through the insight of a village teacher.

For sometimes when we wonder, we can make things begin to happen.

And the teacher dismisses his small class of six a whole hour early with the promise that they will spend the evening wondering why.  All because little Lina wrote an unassigned essay about storks which nest all around her small village but not in it.

And I’m not sure which I found more delightful: an afternoon off school in order to wonder or indignant little Lina the following morning.

“Why, Teacher, they never did [wonder]!  They went ditch jumping.”

As if wonder only happened while sitting quietly on the dike and trying to wonder.  But an unanswered question is a curious thing and once it captivates your imagination, it does not let go so easily.

Imagine if we had more teachers like this one, ready to set aside arithmetic for an unassigned essay and let out school to simply wonder why.  I had an instructor in college who said it was her job as a public educator to stamp out creativity wherever it reared its ugly head.  She was part of a system whose greatest achievement was that it educated children until their favorite question was no longer “Why” but “Will this be on the test?”

Whether or not something will be on a test is the last question on my children’s minds.  But they certainly ask why.  Again and again.  Sometimes I answer and sometimes I don’t, but at the end of the day I find I have to remind myself that asking why is the beginning of learning.  So while making dinner when I’m again asked to explain the color of the sky or why my daughter is not a bird, I try not to send the little explorers away.  Instead I answer,

Hmmm. . . I wonder.  Why do you think?

And sometimes the answers can be quite intriguing.

education homeschool homeschooling

Both the New York Observer and cityfile take a moment to poke fun at the wealthy and at homeschoolers as they take a brief look at a new education service in town: Quality Education by Design (QED), a sort of highly paid governess approach to education.

The New York Observer, for example, summarizes the program’s lofty goals thus:

QED “has little to do with earth mamas teaching hippie spawn. Instead, try field trips to Egyptian pyramids. Visits to the Louvre. Harp lessons from a member of the New York Philharmonic.”  The New York Observer

Because the rest of us, of course, are earth mamas.  And our poor hippie spawn will never have the chance to see anything beyond the patch of organically grown veggies near our earthship home.  Nothing like an estimated $30,000 fee to bring “homeschooling” out of the recesses of the press’s imagination to acquire a few additional stereotypes.  Now we’re urban elites, longing for the glory days of the British aristocracy to be revived here on our own shores.

For cityfile, the real reasons for homeschooling are obvious.

Obsessive parents no longer have to worry about sending their kids to an expensive private school where, despite the hefty tuition, they still don’t get to handpick every teacher and student their child comes into contact with, personally select the school uniform, or dictate the lunch menu in the cafeteria.  cityfile

Instead, they can homeschool.  And thanks to QED, “they don’t even have to join a religious cult in Montana to do it!”  But, well, cityfile appears to be too posh to capitalize its own name, so perhaps it is a bit much to expect them to distinguish between religious cults up there in Montana and here in Nebraska.  I think we both belong to that great swath of the American landscape better known as “flyover country.”

Other than the seemingly irrelevant title, Page Six’s “Hot for Teachers” does a little better job getting at the core philosophy of QED and the inspiration behind it.  Something a lot of us can probably identify with if you throw out the stereotype-laden subtitle.  And the impromptu move to France…although I can certainly identify with the sentiment behind it.

Melissa quickly realized there was no need for concern. In their Left Bank apartment, “we had our lesson plan for that first day. Within three or four days, we were speeding through. There were no distractions! We realized how much time gets wasted in a classroom. We’d anticipated that we’d be in school for four or five ours—because kids are usually in classrooms for five-and-a-half to six hours a day. It ended up taking two hours and we were done.”

That left time for outings to explore Darwin’s theories in the Galapagos, as well as field trips to Egypt and other parts of Africa—not to mention visiting virtually every museum in Paris. By trip’s end, the family realized none of them—even the kids—wanted to go back to Little Red. “All five of us knew we’d experienced something incredible,” recalls Melissa. “And we wanted to hold on to it.” They decided to continue the children’s homeschooling in Manhattan “for another year. It was really a lark, initially.”  Page Six

But eventually, Melissa wanted to go back to being “just a mom,” so they hired a tutor to take over where she had left off.  With their children’s successful re-entrance to the private school scene in their high school years, she realized she was on to something and the idea for QED was born.

What all of these articles completely miss is that you don’t need a $30,000 tuition, an apartment in Paris or a personal and very highly paid tutor to achieve the same kind of individualized and rich educational experience this company is offering.  And it is available to you whether you live in Manhattan or Montana, and whether you are an earth mama, religious zealot or just an average American who cares deeply about your child’s education.

Like QED founder Melissa Meyer discovered, the school part of homeschooling can go amazingly fast without the distractions of the school environment, leaving you a lot more time for life.

Hat Tip: families.com

homeschool QED Quality Education by Design

Bill Heller, a public school teacher, has written a pretty good open letter to President Obama regarding education, highlighting the successes of his own school as well as problems that federal involvement has caused for public education through the passage of No Child Left Behind.  (All block quotes are from the letter, but there is a lot more to it than I’ve selected here).

He makes it clear that problems being faced by some schools in some areas should not direct policy and law making for all schools.  I haven’t seen much vilification of public school teachers in the media, but then my radar is a little more sensitive toward the vilification of homeschoolers.  As a teacher, I received nothing but respect but maybe that is a curiosity of working in a 100% Hispanic school district.  At any rate, he does a fine job of outlining the main problems with No Child Left Behind and the testing craze it has spawned.

I.  Watered down curriculum:

First, by forcing all students to pass certain tests, we’ve essentially had to “water down” important courses. In New York, for example, the biology curriculum has been gutted of content so that everybody can pass a “Regents level” science exam. The new algebra curriculum is great, but the cutoff score is so low that students have figured out that practically anybody who can fog a mirror can pass it. Under the guise of raising standards for all, we end up selling short our most capable students. There is little reward to excel, only to “pass the test.” Both ends of the spectrum get ignored at test time just to get enough students “over the cut score.” By their very design, “magically” determined cutoff scores can be manipulated to produce a predetermined number of students who will pass a given test. Beating the testing game has become an end instead of a means to an end. (Emphasis mine).

There was a time when teachers in my district were shown a graph with a little bubble, the target students.  Children above that bubble would do fine with or without you, children below that bubble were too far from the target to waste resources on.  Almost all instruction was focused on that small bubble near the middle where the teacher was most likely to to be able to have a measurable effect come testing time.

II.  Waste of instructional time

Now, all year long, precious days are lost and enormous amounts of money are spent on annual testing. Out here in the country we have a saying: “Nobody ever fattened a calf by weighing it.” Unfortunately, we’ve figured out that only tested subjects “count” anymore. Many of our limited resources get pumped into the few areas that get tested; other areas are given short shrift when it comes to funding, staffing and, more importantly time. (Emphasis mine).

Yeah.  Once I counted up the required hours for all the “core” (meaning tested subjects), I had exactly five minutes left in the day to teach science, art and history.  I can’t help but laugh when people talk about homeschoolers potentially weak in science.  Who in the public school system cares about science anymore?

III.  Boxing Children Rather than Developing Individual Talents and Interests

In order to play the NCLB game and to avoid having the stigma of being labeled a “failing school,” there is a lot of pressure not to classify needy students in order to avoid having to disaggregate data and make AYP for special education students as a separate subgroup. In addition, students with very limited abilities are dumped into classes that are way beyond their developmental abilities instead of being given appropriate instruction at a level at which they can be successful. Some have been forced to sit through lengthy exams that they have no hope of passing. In the same vein, we need to recognize that not all students will want to pursue a four-year college degree.  (Emphasis mine)

So, uh, now that we’ve established what the current fixation on testing is really accomplishing in many schools, let’s make the homeschoolers play the game, too.

Make homeschooled students take the same tests as public school students are required to take in order to continue homeschooling.

How much sense does that make?  But I’ve written on this subject at length before and shan’t go into it again:

• Why would homeschoolers object to state testing.
• A more concrete objection to testing homeschools.

But it does seem a bit ironic to spend most of a letter attacking testing and then throw a few more kids into the crazy mess it has created.

homeschool homeschooling No Child Left Behind standardized testing

September 22, the State Board of Education will be conducting its final interviews to replace Doug Christensen as Commissioner of Education.  I personally liked Christensen.  I don’t know what his stance was on home education, but he fought valiantly for Nebraska’s STARS system and resisted education chairman Ron Raikes’ bill to require a single, statewide assessment.  He even had to stand up to the US Department of Education.

“We just told the Department of Education that if they were really trying to [serve] all kids and close the proficiency gap that high-stakes testing isn’t the way to do it,” says Doug Christensen, state commissioner of education. “We told them we would show them that we had a better way.”  How Nebraska Leaves No Child Behind

Maybe I never knew his stance on home education because he was too busy fighting the powers that be in order to effectively serve Nebraska’s public school children to worry much about us home educators.

Brian Gong, executive director of the National Center for Improvement of Educational Assessment, said Christensen has been influential in the national testing debate for years.

“Doug Christensen and his staff have been leaders in the nation in saying the form of the assessment and the form of the accountability should be as local as possible,” Gong said. “That obviously has been a minority voice, but one I think that people have really appreciated and have been thinking a lot about.”  Omaha World Herald

And that is really the crux of why I was sad to see him go.  Ted Kennedy, of all people, praised our unique system which successfully incorporated the accountability measures of No Child Left Behind and Nebraska’s historic commitment to local control.  Certainly the system was not perfect, but it was far better than the direction Raikes is leading us.

In the end, Raikes won and Christensen resigned.  We have four finalists, and I’m not sure I’m happy with any of the choices.

• Roger Breed, superintendent of Elkhorn Public Schools
• Virginia Moon, superintendent of Ralston Public Schools
• Dan Hoesing, shared superintendent of Laurel-Concord, Coleridge, Newcastle and Wynot public school districts
• Larry Ramaekers, superintendent of Aurora Public Schools

On a purely gut level, I’m leaning toward Virginal Moon.  But I’m not sure that her resistance to Omaha public schools taking over smaller school districts as Omaha expands necessarily speaks to her broader educational or governing philosophy.

I doubt any of the candidates will be quite what I would like them to be.  Maybe I’m unfairly biased, but the finalists were chosen by the State Board of Education.

Actually, I think Ramaekers will probably get the position.  He sounds like a Commissioner of Education.

And like Meyer [the President of the State Board of Education], he also said the new education commissioner must work to rebuild relationships with members of the Legislature and the governor’s office.

“I think that in the past, the Department of Education has not been as active of a player in that as maybe it should be,” Ramaekers said of assessment and state aid. “I want to make sure the Department of Education is at the table.”  Grand Island Independent

Someone to “heal” the “damage” done by Christensen.  At least that is how I read it.  Someone who isn’t quite so much a leader, but is ready to let that whole “standardized-tests-are-not-legitimate-measures” thing go.

Once that is out of the way, they’ll have a little more time to turn their attention to those homeschoolers.  After all, how do we really know what they are learning if they don’t take The Test?

homeschool education Nebraska Board of Education Doug Christensen

This whole exploration of my personal educational history started with a satire piece written over at the Winston-Salem Journal by one Mike Koivisto.  Who won the Write Scott Hollifield’s Column While He is On Vacation or Performing His Court-Ordered Community Service Contest with his indictment of homeschooling through an overdone stereotype.  I began it the only way such a thing can be answered–with a bit of satire of my own.

But it just wouldn’t happen.  The difficulty is that Mr. Koivisto has the benefit of not knowing what he is talking about as he criticizes homeschooling through fictional examples of his own fictional homeschooled childhood.  I really did attend public school, and I really did learn each of these lessons.  And had to unlearn each of them, as well.

My earliest memory of school was making gingerbread men in Kindergarten.  I remember somewhat sullenly pressing candies into icing, knowing my cookie I was so enthusiastically encouraged to embellish was about to be kidnapped.  See, we had just heard the story of The Gingerbread Man, and I had a foreboding sense of impending doom about the future of my particular gingerbread man.  When we were done, we walked together in single file down the hall to the kitchen where we watched a cook place our cookies in the oven.  Surprise, surprise.  When we returned, the cookies were missing.

I couldn’t figure out why the teacher was putting on such a show of surprise, and I think I might have burst into tears.  I learned an important lesson that year, I think.  Something about not trusting adults and literature being responsible for the theft of cookies.

At the beginning of first grade, Mrs. A. passed out plain sheets of paper and instructed us to color a house.  I made mine with a high peaked roof, two upstairs windows and a door.  It occurred to me that my house looked rather sad.  I know I was a strange kid, but I have always seen faces in houses…still do in fact…and some look like they’ve been bopped in the eye, most look rather bored but a few appear to be grinning from chimney to garage.  The house I lived in smiled, although most of its smile was hidden behind a tree.  I wanted a happy house, so I added a few extra windows in the shape of a bright smile and colored happily until Mrs. A. came and looked over my shoulder.

My house was much happier than she looked.  She scolded,

Houses do not smile.

If I remember correctly, I responded something to the effect of “Mine does.”  Which she took as the height of insolence, though that was the furthest thing from my mind.  So she took my paper and gave me another, demanding I “do it right.”  I somewhat reluctantly restarted my assignment, turned in a miserable, haggard-looking and every-day sort of house which she smiled at and praised.  The praise stung, and I think I burst into tears.  I never did see my happy house again.  I learned another important lesson that day.  Something about creativity and expression being acceptable only under tightly prescribed rules.

By the end of first grade, I had read all of the books in the lower elementary students’ section of the library.  I asked the librarian if I could check one out from the other section, the great big inviting section which looked so much like a small version of the public library rather than a reading corner for little kids.  She smiled kindly and said,

When you are in third grade.

I looked disconsolately at the books while years of re-reading the same baby stories stretched out before me.  And I learned another important lesson about grade level expectations trumping individual abilities and interests.

For second grade, I had Mrs. J. and Anthony, an annoying boy who kicked me under my desk and would immediately raise his hand and tell the teacher I kicked him.  At first, I protested.  I had done no such thing.  He, in fact, had just kicked me.  But she always believed him, always defended him, always said, “But my Anthony would never do a thing like that!”  And I always thought the mere evidence of the case stood overwhelmingly in my favor.  His legs were so long they were literally wrapped under his desk and though I was not exactly short, I couldn’t have reached his desk with my foot if I had tried.  After some time of this, the trouble-maker–that would be me–was moved.  I learned a lot then about justice, fairness and partiality.  And began to develop stomach aches and head aches on a regular basis.  I had a vague suspicion that it was because they were both black, but that would be nothing compared to my first real lesson on the playground.

One winter day, I was playing on the snow drifts with the other children when this little black boy ran up, punched me in the lip and ran off without saying a word.  I told the recess monitor who rounded up every black child on the playground and stood them in a circle around me, demanding I identify the one who hit me.  I looked at them and, surrounded as I was, I’m still no sure whether my tears were from the pain in my lip or from my growing sense of fear.  They stared me down, the group of them, and I had a distinct sense I was going to be jumped by the whole lot at some unsuspecting moment.  I finally pointed out the boy who had hit me, and Ms. V. exclaimed,

Dinky!  I should have known!

And grabbed him by the collar and marched him off to the principal’s office, dismissing me to see the nurse about my lip.  My great lesson in socialization and learning about people different from myself was that blacks were THEM, a group, a haunting group, a dangerous group.  A group to be feared.

Fourth grade, I had Mr. T, by far my favorite elementary school teacher.  He taught with enthusiasm, always had anecdotes and tangents to share about the subjects he obviously knew more about than all our textbooks combined, and he never answered our questions immediately, turning most of them back on us to consider a little more.  He made me think.  I loved being in his class and had more respect for him than I had ever had for any other teacher.  He also noticed that I had a difficult time making friends and took me out in the hallway one afternoon to talk to me about it.

Why don’t you try to be more like the other kids?

I fought back tears…feel them stinging my eyes even now at thirty four as I remember how devastated I was.  As if I wouldn’t have chosen to be “more like the other kids” if I had even known how.

Fifth grade taught me perhaps my second most important lesson.  My best friend (and my only friend at school) stopped playing with me that year with no real explanation.  One day in gym–we were on the same baseball team for class–she sat down next to me on the bench and started to talk to me.  For a few moments, it was like things always were.  The previous few weeks had hung over me like a dark storm cloud as I battled boredom and loneliness, having no one to talk to on the playground.  But for a few moments, the sun shone.  Until Leslie came over and sneered,

I thought I told you I would only play with you if you didn’t talk to Dana, anymore.

The storm broke, and I sought shelter.  Shelter somewhere deep within myself.  My fifth grade year, I learned how to become invisible.  To remain under the radar.  To attract no one’s attention and no one’s scorn.

It was a lesson that would haunt me for years.  I had set an interesting trap for myself.  Everything about how I handled myself told people to stay away, not to notice me, not to engage with me.  And for the most part, they didn’t.  In a crowded classroom, I was alone.  In a busy hallway, I was alone.  Sitting in a noisy cafeteria, I was alone.  And because everyone treated me as if I weren’t there, I felt as if I weren’t.

That all might surprise some of my more regular readers.  I have always said I had a positive school experience.  And I did.

Fifth grade may have taught me my second most important lesson in life, but my most important lesson I did not learn at school or as a result of school.  The summer between eighth and ninth grade, I really began noticing for the first time how differently I was received in my neighborhood than at school…even by the very same people.  Take that back.  I had always known that, but I had always viewed “them” at school as a sort of singular entity, separate from any of the individuals in that group.  In a group, people were very different than they were individually.  But over that summer, I began to really realize that they were not different.  I was.  I was the one who changed according to the social environment.  I was the one who walked confidently around my neighborhood, striking up conversations and rounding up kids for a softball game.  At school, I never made eye contact, rarely spoke and walked quietly along the edge of the hallway, trying to stay out of everyone’s way.

That summer, I had a conversion of sorts.  Not to Christ…that wouldn’t be for another five years…but from a victim to a survivor.  I made a choice not to play the part of the victim, and ninth grade was a very different year for me.  My high school years were some of the best years of my life.  And I never did become quite like other kids.  I accidentally rooted for the wrong team at the only Homecoming game I ever went to, never went to a school dance…not even prom…and found the whole social scene somewhat baffling.  But I had finally found myself and navigated through it all somewhat amused rather than offended.  I loved high school.  I relished not having to fit in. I was no longer being educated by the public education system, but in it.  And I felt free.

______________________________

If you want to know how our first day of school went, I wrote about it on my other blog.  If you enjoyed my pencil story, you will be able to relate.

I think I forgot to mention that the August issue of Heart of the Matter is posted.  Including my article about a public school administrator who called for an exposé on homeschooling.

The Carnival of Homeschooling is up.

homeschool, homeschooling, education, public school