The Sandy Hook Shootings and Homeschooling

As it should, the tragedy of the Sandy Hook school shootings created an outpouring of emotion and sympathy from the public for the victims and their families. Unfortunately, as usual, the larger, social implications of the mass murders are being used by various groups to advance their own agendas: sensationalized, breaking news by competitive media groups who interviewed the children right after their horrible experiences; the political points being scored for and against gun control immediately after the event; calls for putting armed guards in the schools, and so on. I was wondering if it was even appropriate for me to write about the shootings today, but some things need rebuttal, particularly recent charges made about homeschooling in light of the shootings.

I agree that action needs to be taken to restrict access to weapons of mass killing and not just for the mentally ill; the vast majority of gun deaths are caused by “normal” people under the influence of drugs, alcohol, or uncontrolled emotion. But I want to move beyond the conventional boundaries of the gun debate and explore why when these horrific events happen people view homeschooling both as an alternative that provides safety for children and as an act of extreme individualism that destroys the social fabric of America.

An opinion article in the New York Times that appeared on Dec. 16, 2012, written by a philosophy professor, had what I thought was a good argument about how we delude ourselves that an armed society creates a civil society, however it bothers me how he uses homeschooling as his prime example of extreme individualism. Like many academics that are critical of homeschooling, this author makes an assumption about how all homeschoolers act and think based on little evidence:

After all, a population of privately armed citizens is one that is increasingly fragmented, and vulnerable as a result. Private gun ownership invites retreat into extreme individualism — I heard numerous calls for homeschooling in the wake of the Newtown shootings — and nourishes the illusion that I can be my own police, or military, as the case may be.

. . . Our gun culture promotes a fatal slide into extreme individualism. It fosters a society of atomistic individuals, isolated before power — and one another — and in the aftermath of shootings such as at Newtown, paralyzed with fear. That is not freedom, but quite its opposite.

Clearly this writer views homeschooling as embracing the “I got mine, you get yours” ethos, which is in homeschooling if you look for it: for instance, support groups that only support people of the right faith who will sign statements of faith, or the secular version where new members must reveal their educational and economic backgrounds before being considered for admittance. However, this ethos is well established in our school system, too: public schools determine access based on one’s zip code and private schools can deny admission based on religious beliefs or lack of income and that is perfectly okay with our society. “I got mine, you get yours” is embedded in the way we distribute education in America. Many, including me, feel that homeschooling is a way to bridge this divide rather than make it larger, by making education much more personal and local than it currently is.

I am an inclusive homeschooler: I am open to new people and new ideas coming into homeschooling and I think this is the best way for us to grow and become strong as a movement; too much inbreeding is always a bad thing. John Holt saw that homeschooling could merely mimic the school system, but he felt it was a risk well worth taking in light of the inbreeding he saw in schools of education. Holt had, as I do, faith and hope that if people spend time listening, playing, and working with children outside of schools, new opportunities will present themselves for finding, as Holt put it, “work worth doing and lives worth living, not just, or even a better education.” New combinations of schooling and living are certainly happening, slowly but surely, as homeschoolers move in and out of school and college, leverage online and other types of classes and mentoring, or go directly into work without conventional—or any—high school or college degrees. This is not an insignificant development in a world where more intensive and costly schooling is the default answer to all school problems. But all this gets lost when homeschooling is cast out of the conversation as extreme individualism and nothing else.

The biggest irony for me about homeschooling being viewed as extreme individualism is that the driving impetus for embracing homeschooling by Holt (Teach Your Own), Ivan Illich (Deschooling Society), and others is to create a convivial society, one where children aren’t segregated by age and law from other people, where knowledge and skills are openly shared. Another irony is how educationists claim that homeschooling is not concerned with supporting public institutions or commons. Illich (and other thinkers like him, such as E.F. Schumaker and John MacKnight) wrote deeply about our loss and need for public commons; the institutional model for learning often cited by Holt (and later by John Gatto) is the public library, not the public school. Open to all, no questions asked if you check out Dr. Seuss or the works of Einstein regardless of your age, young and old organizing or attending events together—the public library is a convivial model we can build upon. In addition, Holt provides many other ideas for places and opportunities that help people learn in his book Instead of Education: Ways to Help People Do Things Better.

Holt viewed learning as both a personal and a social activity, and he saw homeschooling as a way to reintegrate those activities for learners. School atomizes them, emphasizing personal achievement and competition for grades over social activities, particularly free conversation and play in school. Now even recess is closely controlled, if the school has recess at all, and free-ranging conversation among children in school has always been viewed as taking away valuable instruction time from teachers. Since compulsory schooling was created in the United States children and teachers have written about how their love of learning and individuality are crushed by school: Holt, Kozol, Kohl, Dennison, Herndon, wrote a lot about this in the sixties and seventies; Kirsten Olsen’s Wounded By School makes this case for the twenty-first century. There is something that must be done in society and school for supporting individualism, though that discussion is curtailed when the discussion is polarized into you must attend school to contribute to society or else you are an extreme individualist.

The big picture I have is of a society that is open and generous towards its young, allowing them to have many different types of teachers, scopes, and sequences (to use the language of schools) for learning in or out of school. This inclusive vision of learning won’t prevent violence, but I think it will diminish it a lot by providing people who are alienated from their schools and social spheres with a fresh start in a different environment (not necessarily a different school!) or just different people in their lives.

Inclusive homeschooling and its larger goal of creating a convivial society get lost as educationists portray homeschoolers as extreme individualists and conventional schooling as the best place for children to learn and grow. Perhaps I’m in the minority among homeschoolers with these thoughts; some homeschoolers do want to be extreme individualists and that’s fine—you have the right and ability to do so in the United States, and sometimes circumstances make being an extreme individualist your only good option.

However, I want to continue finding and working with homeschoolers and others who want to build a society that provides numerous ways and supports for people to live and learn together, not just more secure, gated schools. Tragedies like Sandy Hook should make us think more broadly about what we can do about school violence, rather than make us circle the wagons more tightly and exclude homeschooling as a way to contribute to the solution.

John Taylor Gatto Update

John Gatto, author of Dumbing Us Down, The Underground History of American Education, and many other titles, suffered a stroke about 18 months ago that left him paralyzed on the left side of his body. He has been struggling through rehab and is slowly but surely getting better. Barb Lundgren, founder of the Rethinking Everything conference, has created a fundraising website to help with John Taylor Gatto’s ongoing medical and living expenses. When you use the Paypal donate button there your donation will go directly to John’s medical fund account.

The John Taylor Gatto Medical Fund

John and Janet weathered Hurricane Sandy in their Manhattan apartment, and John is showing significant improvement though he still has a long way to go.

John’s vocal chords were paralyzed but he has been working a lot at speaking and he is becoming much easier to understand. His mind is still quite active and he is thinking about life and education constantly. When my wife and I visited him in August he spent more than an hour with me talking about Ben Franklin’s ideas about the hand–mind connection for learning, as well as his thoughts on the political situation for homeschoolers. He is, of course, depressed by his physical condition but has lately found new determination to keep with his exercise/rehab regimen and he is now able to sit at a desk and write for about three hours, which gives him (and us!) great hope.

Barb Lundgren is the point of contact for people who want to help with some of John’s nonfinancial needs, too. In particular, the Gattos are seeking someone in the New York area who has a van that can accept a wheelchair so John can get to his dentist and doctor appointments in Manhattan; eventually, John would like to take a trip to see his garlic farm in upstate New York.

John and Janet also need help to negotiate the medical care system in New York City and if anyone is willing to help them as a sort of “medical advocate” it would be greatly appreciated. Please keep John and Janet in your hearts and minds as the holiday season begins.

The Future of Education Interview

Tomorrow, September 11, 2012, I'll be interviewed at 8PM by Steve Hargadon at The Future of Education. This is a free online event, and listeners will be able to send questions via text to Steve to ask me. A recording of the show will be available for free download after the show.

Steve and I plan to discuss John Holt's work as an educator and how John came to be one of homeschooling's earliest and most important advocates. I hope you'll join us and contribute to the conversation!

Teach Your Own: A Seminar About Homeschooling and Unschooling

I’m trying to gauge interest for bringing my latest workshop about homeschooling and unschooling to Portland, ME.

If 10 or more people contact me via email (pfarenga at comcast.net) by October 3 or sooner with interest, my friend Beth Della Torre Callahan will find me a space to do the seminar and I’ll send out registration materials to all who contacted me with interest.

Proposed Location: Portland, ME

Proposed Date: Saturday, Nov. 3, from 9AM to 1PM.

For detailed information about the seminar, and to read testimonials by people who attended the most recent one, click here.

Words and Deeds Matter: In Memory of Gene Burkart

Gene Burkart, a lawyer, homeschooler, scholar, and dear friend, succumbed to cancer this past weekend at age 62. He met his death peacefully with his faith, family, and friends supporting him through his final days. Gene was, to me, an unsung hero of homeschooling and local politics in Massachusetts, and his death has left me with an empty feeling.

From the time I met Gene in the early 1980s until he died, he spoke about the work of Ivan Illich with clarity and passion. Indeed, Gene patiently helped me to understand and appreciate Illich’s work over time; like many, I was more confused than excited by Illich’s writing at first, and Gene offered insights and suggestions over the years that eventually led to me share his enthusiasm for Illich. Our long drives from Boston to State College, PA, to spend time with Ivan Illich and friends, were full of memorable conversations; we never put the radio on during those trips. Gene became quite close to Ivan; indeed, the last time I was with Ivan was at Gene’s house, where we had a lovely dinner, just months before Ivan died. Gene went from skepticism about Illich’s ideas to a profound embrace of them, including studying with Ivan Illich in Cuernavaca, Chicago, New York, and Pennsylvania over the years.

Gene was always willing to help homeschoolers, and in the 1980s and 1990s he would draft letters to school districts, represent families in court, and provide advice, often pro bono, for homeschooling families in need. In the past decade, homeschooling became so common in MA that Gene was rarely contacted by homeschoolers, a development he was very happy about. I not only sent a number of people to Gene for help, but I sometimes relied on him to help with legal problems we had at Holt Associates, as well as some state-wide homeschooling issues, and he always rose to the occasion with clarity and cheer.

Gene spoke Spanish and worked often with immigrants; Gene’s people-based practice of the law reflected his integration of mind, body, and spirit. Ideas and beliefs are not to be just mouthed but acted upon in life, and Gene did this with gusto and commitment. He was a cofounder of Waltham’s community gardens, and a long-time advocate for world peace. In 1982 he became an active member of Waltham Concerned Citizens, a group concerned about nuclear weapons disarmament; Gene hosted survivors of the bombing of Hiroshima at his home one year and in 2005 he began a twice-monthly peace vigil in downtown Waltham, holding signs and drawing a crowd to advocate for bringing our troops home from our current wars.

In the last few years, Gene turned to writing and he often shared his work with others and through our local newspapers. For instance, I was pleasantly surprised one morning to read this brilliant, concise letter in the Boston Globe (May 23, 2010):

SCOT LEHIGH’S May 14 op-ed “We need it, but who’ll pay for a longer school day?’’ made me wonder: What was his reaction when he was in fifth grade and the bell rang at the end of the day? Was it, “Gee, I wish I could stay here another two hours?’’ Probably he was like most of us. We couldn’t wait for the doors to open.

Many adults tend to romanticize their school days, confusing schooling with learning. Social philosopher Ivan Illich attributed this phenomenon to what he called the “hidden curriculum of schooling.’’ More than any subject matter, more than the content of what is taught, schools teach above all else the necessity of schools. They instill the belief that only in school does real learning take place.

This causes many to have an inflated sense of the benefit and effectiveness of schooling. They think that more school means more learning. The opposite, however, is true. At a certain point, prolonged schooling becomes counterproductive, actually hindering and stifling initiative, creativity, curiosity, and the joy of learning.

How many students today read a book that’s not on a required list? We need less school, not more.

Eugene Burkart

Waltham

This year, 2012, Gene started a column for the Waltham News Tribune titled “Second Thoughts.” He wrote fluently about social justice issues as well as how his local community has changed, for better and worse. Here is Gene’s last column, published just about ten days before he died. It is filled with Gene’s sense of concern and justice for the individual and his outrage at the horrors of unbridled progress: Second Thoughts: Memories and the Ethic of Hiroshima.

 If you enjoy reading that piece, here is a page that lists all of Gene’s articles that were published by the Waltham News Tribune.

After Illich died, Gene contributed an essay to a book written in Illich's memory, The Challenges of Ivan Illich: A Collective Reflection (SUNY Press, 2002). In his essay, Gene writes how he didn't understand Illich's critique of the modern economy until he had been practicing law for several years:

After a while, I saw the joke. When people asked me, "How's work going?" I would answer, "Never been better. Families are falling apart, so there is plenty of divorce and juvenile delinquency; arrests are up, so I have a lot of criminal trials; auto accidents and injures at work are high, so my personal injury caseload is huge. Business is good." In a strange way all of us in the service economy are feeding off social decay, a kind of cannibalizing of society.

Gene's questioning of his work and life, coupled with Illich's influence, made him realize he could live a good life without selling out his soul or checking out of society. In his essay about Illich's influence on him Gene writes:

I realized that I did not have to quit my day job—I could simply work at it less. I soon began a four-day week, which freed me up to read and study more, and become more active in my community. I did not have to get rid of my car, but I could ride my bicycle to work. I knew I would not be self-sufficient in growing food, but I could do composting and enlarge our vegetable garden. Later, when we had children, it was an easy decision not to put them in school. I also began to see my legal work in a new light. I knew it would not lead to social change (with the possible exception of homeschooling cases), but my clients' concerns were real, they were entangled in a morass or legal and social systems. Perhaps I could be an experienced guide for them through these thickets.

Gene ends his essay by noting his "overwhelming sense of gratitude" to Ivan Illich for all he has given him: "Friendship does not lend itself to an accounting, to economics. The only way I can hope to show my gratitude is to strive to be for others the kind of friend Ivan Illich has been to me." I can say with all my heart that Gene was a kind, great friend and that I am a better person as a result of our friendship.

A memorial service for Gene Burkart will be held at Christ Church, 750 Main Street, Waltham, MA at 11AM on August 25, 2012.