Home is where the heart is, not where the school is.

Disclosure: I am a public school teacher. I was, previously, a private school teacher. I have taught kindergartners and I have taught college students. I am also kind of smart, which may or may not be evident from what you read here.

There is a very famous bloggy person whose blog name rhymes with The Flyin’ Ear Flommen who homeschools her children. When Dan and I raised the possibility of writing our opinions about homeschooling, I went there first to see what she had to say about it. Plus, since where The Flyin’ Ear Flommen goes, commenters by the truckload follow. And that’s much easier research than the tedious real kind.

And what I found there supported what my gut told me. And everybody who has already decided that you disagree with me (I’m looking at you Pam D and Nutmeg) take a deep breath and stick with me.

Most of the people who homeschool their kids do it for reasons that have nothing to do with providing the best educations for their kids. In fact, most of the time people choose to homeschool, they are doing so in order to fulfill a need of their own, and not any of their kids needs at all.

If you have a child with a disability so serious that finding a school to meet his/her educational and psychosocial needs is an impossiblity, then homeschooling is a valid option.

If you live so far from the school that your child would spend an unreasonably long time commuting to and from school to the detriment of that child’s physical, emotional health or balance and well-being of the family, homeschooling is a valid option.

If sending your child to a dangerous or substandard public school is the only option for your family because of economic hardship, homeschooling is a valid option – of course this means that an adult is sacrificing work, and therefore earning, time to be home educating the child/children.

Otherwise. Send your kids to school. You don’t like the district you’re in? Move. You can’ t move but you don’t like what or how the curriculum is being taught? Get involved. It is the responsibility of every citizen of this country to support public education. It has always been in the best interest of every American citizen to have a well-educated populace. You don’t like the schools? Think beyond your own kitchen table and consider that one day you might be depending on one of those people attending the school of which you disapprove to fix your car, fill your teeth, or prepare your tax returns. At the risk of getting all hoity toity up in your grill, Gandhi said, “Be the change you wish to see in the world.” You don’t like what you see? Change it. And not just for yourself, but for all of us.

Anti-homeschoolers argue that homeschooled children miss out on a ton of valuable socialization. Homeschoolers argue that this is nonsense because their children are exposed to lots of people through the course of the day. Frankly, I think this particular issue is a wash. Six of one.

But. Not everybody can teach. If you’ve ever had a shitty teacher, you KNOW that’s true. Parenthood, and an intimate knowledge of your kid and your kid’s learning style and temperament doesn’t automatically qualify you to teach. Most reasonably intelligent and motivated people could do the research and background work to learn what they need to in order to convey the facts, the data, the processes, the equations, the terminology, the basic skills that teachers convey. But to say that this is all school does is shortsighted and just plain wrong.

School settings create environments in which students can do two things:

1) establish their own identities, as is developmentally appropriate and natural, separate from their parents and families of origin. That separation and subsequent emotional growth is thwarted when the student doesn’t have as many opportunities for self-exploration outside of the family circle.

2) learn how to think, communicate, behave, and relate to people in groups, even and especially when members of a particular group – including, sadly, teachers sometimes – are objectionable, dumb, and not especially nice.

Unless there is a really good reason to keep your children at home, and unless you are willing to devote a huge amount of time to the work of teaching your kids (Most people underestimate how much time and energy teachers spend in preparation and response in a regular education classroom setting with a determined curriculum. Planning an alternative curriculum tailored to a student’s individual needs while still maintaining the state standards is a massive undertaking. You cannot work outside the home and homeschool.) you are doing a disservice to your children and to your community and to all of our futures by homeschooling.

Teaching takes patience, not rocket science.

I will agree with Jane on at least one point in this debate: She IS smart. From what she tells me she always got excellent grades and she sports an Ivy League education that she downplays at every opportunity (including this one, most likely). She’s quick on her feet and can process certain kinds of complex issues really quickly.

But I’m also kind of smart. I’m not sure how our intelligence is relevant to this discussion, but Jane brought it up, so I feel I should make mention of it, too. My IQ has been tested at genius levels. There, I said it in public. However? It should be noted that no quantity of IQ can prevent every stupid decision or bad conclusion. Jane and me included. And now, on with the show.

I don’t homeschool my kids. But when we considered our options, homeschooling was one of the choices on the table. The negatives aren’t nearly as bad as Jane suggests, and there are some impressive positives that even I wasn’t aware of.

But first, I’d like to remove from Jane’s argument the idea that you can get involved and make a difference if your student has a shitty teacher. Jane belongs to the Teacher Mafia, Local 327. Has your child ever had a terrible teacher that’s been a terrible teacher for a decade and they just can’t seem to get rid of her? No level of involvement short of a Chris Hansen style sting is going to get the school to act against a teacher by terminating her. They’re unionized. They’re tenured. Short of getting caught having sex with a student, there’s no way you can make a difference by getting a teacher to improve or be removed.

You totally guessed my next point, didn’t you. Studies show that less than one one-hundreth of a percent of homeschooled kids are ever sexually molested while in their learning environment. Compare that to data from the US Department of Education stating that “nearly 9.6% of students are targets of educator sexual misconduct sometime during their school career.” Thank God the Catholic deaf kids in Milwaukee had to go to special schools, right?

On this next point, I have to concur with Jane. She said “…an intimate knowledge of your kid and your kid’s learning style and temperament doesn’t automatically qualify you to teach.” I don’t know about you, but to me that read a lot like “…being able to start every foot race with a 30-yard head start doesn’t automatically give you the blue ribbon.”

I mean, come on. One-on-one teaching? Intimate knowledge of how the child learns? Unquestionably greater desire and motivation to make sure the child gets the education s/he needs? It’s true – all of that doesn’t mean a parent is qualified to teach. Related: many of those who’d be awesome teachers don’t teach. Also related: teaching is not brain surgery. Only brain surgery is actually brain surgery. I’ve looked through my Facebook. Lots of dumb former classmates are now imparting their halfwit knowledge to our future generations as teachers.

I’ll say this again: I think Jane is not the norm. She IS smart. I know her kids love her. And she kicks teaching ass. And every kid who’s been in her classroom should feel fortunate to have been there. But Jane’s not the norm. She’s not even the Cliffy.

And I’m not going to bombard you with data. But I will hit you with links where you can dig deeper, if you wanna. The gist of the linkage? The success of homeschoolers in national academic contests is enormously disproportionate to their numbers, relative to traditionally schooled children. They’re more than twice as likely to be actively involved in an ongoing community service activity. They’re more likely to attend college. In every objective measure, homeschoolers test higher.

Devising a curriculum from scratch based on the needs of your child IS a big job. So big that no teacher does it. Not even Jane. She does it for an entire class, not one student. And in this beautiful free market society, there are organizations and companies dedicated to helping you, should you want to homeschool your child – and all for a lot less than what you’re paying in taxes for a public school education.

Oddly, Jane poo-pooed what I felt was her strongest argument: homeschooled kids may grow up to be social retards. This is the only facet that I think is inherently dangerous in homeschooling a child. This is the only non-no-brainer for homeschooling. Only with conscientious planning and scheduling of socialization time can a parent be reasonably sure their child will learn to navigate their teenage years. But it can be done.

You want to get involved? Get involved with your local or state government. Help to push an agenda that would allow homeschooled children to have checks cut to them, diverting funding that would have been spent on them in a public school, so their parents can use that $5-6,000 per year on their education. THAT, Dan & Jane readers, is what will spark change. The Big Three auto makers were pretty fat and happy, putting substandard product on the roads, until the Japanese sat down to the table and started eating all their market share. Then there was change aplenty.

Contrary to what Jane says, the only disservice you do in homeschooling your children is not giving your kids the chance to get cyberbullied into suicide or ridden like a dollar pony at the county fair. You’ve got to be smart and conscientious and willing to put in the time, but I have yet to meet a homeschooling parent that doesn’t already realize all of that going into it.

A great big thank you to Pamela Dayton at The Dayton Time for providing me with data and links. Tongueless smooches your way.

Podcast

Maybe it was cold the day Dan went shopping at the mall. Maybe there’s a pragmatic reason to display mannequins with gumdrop-sized nipples. Other than to pique Dan’s interest, that is.

Here’s what Dan and Jane think about it.

Audio gadget not working? You can download the file here. Just click!

I’m hoping for a little trim…

I met a guy named Chuck at my local cigar hangout recently.

Chuck liked my hair.

Said he wanted to cut it.

Said he had a hair place.

He didn’t look anything like Buffalo Bill,  so I would’ve helped him pushing that couch into his van, but hello?  Lit cigar.  Busy.

Before he went looking for someone else to help him with his couch and we parted ways with a slightly limp-wristed handshake, he mentioned with a bit of disdain that “we don’t do ‘ten bucks and tits’ at my hair place.”   (Insert Scooby Doo “Ruh?”  noise here.)

You need to know – it’s only in the last 7 months that I’ve let my hair grow out, so I’m having to reintroduce myself to the world of hair cutting and hair products.  I’d totally forgotten about the television ads for the “dude parlors” with their big screen TVs, free chips and drinks, and of course, tits.  Thanks for reminding me, Chuck.

I mean, it’s only hair, right? And it’s ten bucks.   If I get a terrible cut from a buxom blond, I can always buzz it and grow new.  Hair’s cool that way.  Plus, it’s cheaper than a cover charge to a strip club, and I’d get about the same amount of body contact.  I think.  I’ve only ever been to a strip club once.   That I remember.  Sorta.  And why was my underwear ripped in two and in my pocket the next morning?  So many questions.

Where was I?   Right.  Hooters girls with scissors.

I get to my appointment and pretty much see what I expect to see:

• A dude that just paid $25 for a #1 clipper cut.
• Two other dudes sitting far apart from each other, waiting for their cuts, trying not to make eye contact with any other man.   Like it’d ruin the fantasy or something.
• Two attractive women wearing, well, if you’re sitting down? Things get a little cheeky.

But honestly?  That’s where the whole façade disintegrated.  I’m not sure what I was expecting – getting a lapper while she cut my bangs or the offer of a “motorboat special,” but once I sat in the chair, it was all business. Danielle, my “Sexy Stylist,” had the usual shit in her stall.   Picture of her kid, ubiquitous fridge-worthy kid artwork.   No grinding on the barber chair.  No arms-up twirling between working on the left sideburn and the right.  Totally NOT wood-inducing.

And I’m a chatter, but despite the pig suit I don when I write here, in real life I’m not the same person.  So none of the conversation contained “tits” or “toots.”  Just a dude, getting his hair cut.  By a chick with her boobs hangin’ out.  Talking about work, kids and gas prices.  And how they used to have bouncers here.  And the mid-day drunks that come in looking for a little trim.

And honestly?  The two heaving gorillas in the room made the conversation a little awkward, especially since I knew she had sharp objects in her hands, but Danielle made up for it by being very communicative about where she should cut, how much to cut, etc.  She actually seemed more interested in giving me a decent cut than an equally-priced Fantasticutters bowl job.

And when it was done, she had.  I passed on the after-cut massage.   (See?  So not a pig.)

The thing is, I’ve had women show more cleavage at trade shows selling diamond brick-cutting blades.  This was a good, no-nonsense cut executed by a friendly stylist who happened to have ass cheeks I could see if I looked at the correct angle.  No big whup.