A new revolution is under way, according to the cover story of the latest Time Magazine. It’s aimed at rolling back “the almost comical overprotectiveness and overinvestment of moms and dads.” Call it slow parenting, simplicity parenting, free-range parenting, the magazine notes, but the message is the same: “Less is more; hovering is dangerous; failure is fruitful. You really want your children to succeed? Learn when to leave them alone. When you lighten up, they’ll fly higher. We’re often the ones who hold them down.”
A fair amount of the piece looks at the mixed blessing of hyperinvolved parents in schools. Parental involvement in education is unambiguously good. But how much is too much? Like Justice Potter Stewart’s definition of pornography, you know it when you see it.
Teachers now face a climate in which parents ghostwrite students’ homework, airbrush their lab reports — then lobby like a K Street hired gun for their child to be assigned to certain classes. Principal Karen Faucher instituted a “no rescue” policy at Belinder Elementary in Prairie Village, Kans., when she noticed the front-office table covered each day with forgotten lunch boxes and notebooks, all brought in by parents. The tipping point was the day a mom rushed in with a necklace meant to complete her daughter’s coordinated outfit.
Time writer Nancy Gibbs quotes a guidance counselor at a Washington prep school who urges parents to make friends with parents who don’t think their kids are perfect, and willing to push back: “When schools debate whether to drop recess to free up more test-prep time, parents need to let a school know if they think that’s a trade-off worth making.”
Lenore Skenazy, whose account of letting her nine-year-old son ride the subway on his own was the shot heard round the world of the helicopter parenting backlash, points out there are no reports of a child ever being poisoned by a stranger handing out tainted Halloween candy. And the odds of being kidnapped and killed by a stranger are about 1 in 1.5 million.
When parents confront you with “How can you let him go to the store alone?,” she suggests countering with “How can you let him visit your relatives?” (Some 80% of kids who are molested are victims of friends or relatives.) Or ride in the car with you? (More than 430,000 kids were injured in motor vehicles last year.) “I’m not saying that there is no danger in the world or that we shouldn’t be prepared,” she says. “But there is good and bad luck and fate and things beyond our ability to change. The way kids learn to be resourceful is by having to use their resources.”
The best quote in the piece belongs to Skenazy. “10 is the new 2,” she quips. “We’re infantilizing our kids into incompetence.”
As a mother of a 2 year-old and 4-year-old. I walk a fine line every day with letting my children experience the world on their own and being too protective. I live in NYC, and the horrid stories about children on the 11 o’clock news is enough to make a parent go into hiding until their children are 25.
I also work at a place where I encounter these helicopter parents every day. They’re annoying, to say the least, so I have a daily reminder of who or what I don’t want to be as a mom.
I once had a mother knock on my classroom door right before lunch, to give her daughter a little pie she’d just taken from the oven a few minutes earlier. Seriously.
And I like Nancy Gibbs’ assertion that parents *should* talk to teachers and school officials about policies and practices that need examination. Sometimes, the school can provide clarifying reasons–and sometimes, things need to be changed.
At the risk of starting a Big Ugly Fight–how do we reconcile homeschooling with helicopter parenting? In my experience, parents who choose to homeschool do so because they don’t want their children to socialize with children not preselected by the homeschooling parents –and don’t want their children to have to suffer from boredom, lack of teacher attention, new ideas that haven’t been pre-screened by Mom, dangerous playground bullies and so on. All the things that ultimately make children resourceful.
Many, if not most home-schoolers do it because they are religious zealots. I have some bible thumpers next door who home school their 4 children when they are not telling me to accept Jesus as my savior.
Many of the home-school websites and blogs have religious undertones, convincing me I am on the right track.
Surely there are some like Nancy describes; I think home schooling is a rebellion against perceived indoctrination. It is a separatist movement populated by zealots–anti-government, pro-religion, racist.
Some home-schoolers are helicopter parents, some aren’t. Much like ‘normal’ parents, it depends on the family. I’m sorry you’ve mostly met the weird isolationist ones– they’re not the norm, but they’re the ones that stick out the most.
We’re homeschooling because we care about education. It’s true I want to protect my kids from long, boring days at a desk where they learn nothing, but they have plenty of unscheduled time where they need to entertain themselves.
They also have classes at the Y, sports, and when they’re older, scouting and 4-H.
There are as many reasons for home-schooling as there are home-schoolers. As for ‘protection from ideas,’ –well, it’s true, we’re not going to be spending a lot of time on drug-education for kindergarteners…. History and Science are MUCH more entertaining, and useful, too!
Many of the homeschoolers I know are frustrated with the current wishy-washy curriculums at most schools— they’re actually home-schooling because they’re into the whole ‘core knowledge’ thing!
As for equating ‘homeschooler’ with ‘helicopter parent’— As my children grow, I EXPECT them to be more independant– we live in a small town with sidewalks, and I fully expect them to be able to walk alone to the library and ice cream store by the time they’re 8 or 9. I expect them to be able to entertain themselves and take care of themselves. My 5 year old can already get snacks for herself and her youngerr siblings!
Honestly, I think helicopter parents are more likely to be those who feel like they don’t get ENOUGH contact with their kids–so that they feel the need to make up for it by smothering them.
As a homeschooler, I suspect that I know more homeschoolers than people whose children are in school. I have yet to meet xenophobic racists among the homeschoolers I know, nor others who fit the stereotypes mentioned above. Homeschoolers appear to me to differ from each other as much as schoolers do.
I find them not so much anti-anything as pro- meeting their children’s needs. Such as the mom who found that meeting the bus schedule was making her family nuts and now homeschools to the satisfaction of everyone in her family. One of the reasons my family homeschools is because the children spend time with a more diverse group of people, especially age-wise.
BTW Nancy, do you really want to argue that being exposed to a playground bully at a tender age makes one more resourceful? If little kids can figure out for themselves how to cope with a bully, why is bullying seen as a problem by so many teachers and administrators? Or do young people need a certain level of maturity and sense of self before they can handle bullies?
Nancy, I do think that some homeschooling is driven by the desire to protect children. If I had it to do over again, I would homeschool for the middle school years. Little was learned (little was taught), the social atmostphere was toxic, the playground was violent, and the incompetent administration had decided that the paramount goal was social development, which they were totally unable to foster. Agreed that some parents (particularly the religious zealots) are trying to “cocoon” their children. Others are just doubtful that the benefits of meeting the challenge of your local school are outweighed by the drawbacks.
It’s interesting — based on these comments — to see how the perceptions of homeschoolers have evolved. The common stereotype several years ago was “religious zealot.” Now we’re just as likely to hear “overprotective parent.” It strikes me as a very broad movement, which makes generalizations difficult. On my list of things to do in education between now and the day I die is to explore the potential to organize low-income families in urban communities into something like homeschooling cooperatives. It seems like a reasonable response to lousy inner city schools. If anyone should be homeschooling it’s those families–and they’re statistically the least likely to do so for any number of reasons.
I’m a public school teacher and I have secretly daydreamed about homeschooling my own kids, when they come along. I love caring for children and I love teaching them, and nothing seems more natural than teaching my own children. I also live in NYC, and the opportunities that large cities present for homeschoolers are absolutely staggering. It’s tempting.
I also have the sense that, as Robert said, homeschoolers do it for many reasons–not just religious reasons or “helicopter parenting,” but for health reasons or as a response to very unique needs in a child or simply because they like it. I would fall into that latter category myself. It will probably be forever a dream of mine, and I’d feel fine sending my child to the school in which I teach, but still, sometimes it sounds like fun.
As noted, it wasn’t my intention to marshal arguments for/against homeschooling. My husband and I spent some time seriously considering a stretch of homeschooling for my son, after a particularly bad year in the third grade. In the end, we opted to send him back to the same school, and decided to be more vocal and proactive about the things that bothered us– substituting, perhaps, one form of helicopter parenting for the option of removing him from the mix.
Nobody wants their kids terrorized on the playground or ignored in the classroom and that isn’t what I was suggesting. It’s not about exposing kids to things that will toughen them up. Only this: too many children are dependent on their parents to monitor their schoolwork, schedule their lives, solve their social dilemmas and make their decisions. They end up expecting mom to bail them out.
My son, the lone Asian child in his school, was being tormented by teasing because he looked different. It didn’t happen in the classroom, but on the bus, in the cafeteria and at recess the other kids were calling him names. One kid, Tommy–who lived down the street from us and whose father was a Vietnam vet–persisted in calling him a gook. In the end, my son needed to learn how to articulate and think about his own defense and his own identity, and teach the 8-year olds who were his friends how to speak up for him, as well. Homeschooling would have taken him out of the misery, but removed the opportunity for valuable lessons.
The last time he came home crying, my first thought was to walk down the block and confront Tommy’s parents about their son’s awful behavior. But then my daughter (who was 11 and riding the same bus) came in and pointed out that “everyone knows Tommy is a jerk, and his dad’s a jerk, too. Just ignore him.” That helped a great deal more than righteous anger and parent intervention. It takes time and practice for children to be able to solve their own dilemmas.
How does home schooling, and the consequence that each family will teach different something different, gel with Hirsch’s and Core Knowledge’s ideas that society needs a common reference point of knowledge, skills and culture from which to work?
I don’t believe there is an “official” Core Knowledge position on homeschooling, however there are many, many homeschooling families that use Core Knowledge — especially the “What Your…Grader Needs to Know” series of books–as the basis for their homeschooling curriculum. Given the relatively small number of schools that implement the Core Knowledge curriculum rigorously, it is also safe to say a family that wants their child to have the curriculum is more likely to get it via homeschooling than in their local public school.
I would think that many homeschooling parents would like CK precisely because they DO want a common point of reference, and they would like their children to have a grasp of history, literature, math, science, and the arts.
My main reservation about homeschooling is that children need adult influences other than their parents. Especially if there is conflict and violence in the home, or if the parents are possessive and restrict their children’s contacts, it is good for children to have regular, built-in contact with other adults and children.
Diana, What evidence is there that homeschooled children get less, or more for that matter, contact with other adults and children than children in school?
Note that you are arguing not on the basis of academics but rather of sociability and socialization, all of which went on normally long before Horace Mann and the development of the American public school and still do without it.
Is there a study out there showing that homeschooled kids are more likely to be overly sheltered? Or is this prejudice? It’s one thing to wonder about it and another to make accusations. The few families that I personally know are not keeping their kids in closets, but I can tell you that they are some of the nicest and most polite children I’ve ever met. As Robert indicated, it really isn’t possible to make generalizations about homeschoolers. My kids are in public school, but I’m trying to muster up the full courage to homeschool my daughter for the middle years. Actually what I want to do is start some sort of homeschooling co-op that would eventually morph into a school. The curriculum I will adopt is my own blend of Core Knowledge and The Well-trained Mind. Bare bones and free of fillers and gimmicks is my plan. I know I have the expertise for curriculum, but how to handle the legal and financial factors is the part that will make this so hard. I’d like it to be some sort of non-profit school that is very affordable – a crazy dream perhaps?! What we need is an organization that helps people start co-ops and small non-profit private schools – anyone know of anything like that?
I don’t think I made accusations or generalizations. I was talking about those particular cases where parents are very possessive or have troubles they don’t want the outside world to see.
Do I have evidence? No, but I have seen families like that, and if they were homeschooling, this could be a problem.
I have no trouble believing that many homeschooling parents do a great job and also take care to keep their children in contact with the outside world.
Come on, Diana, you know that schools are no panacea for troubled families. The news all too frequently carries sad if not tragic stories of children in school systems that were not helped.
This blog and others, such as Joanne Jacobs, delineate a host of troubles in our public school systems. Some parents survey the scene and send their children to private schools. That’s normal. Some parents with the same concerns home school. They are deemed weird, unhealthy, and potentially dangerous to their children. By marginalizing homeschoolers, opponents of reform neutralize a potent criticism of our schools. And reformers buy into it. What are you thinking?
Homeschooling Granny,
I didn’t mean my comment to give fodder to anyone. Nor did I imply that schools were a panacea for anything whatsoever.
We need to be able to make comments without worrying about whose hands we are playing into. This was not an op-ed or political statement. It was a comment.
We all have blind spots, whether we’re teachers, parents, students, or a combination of all of these or none. No matter how insightful we are, we cannot see or accurately judge all that we do, especially in the moment.
So the parent or teacher with the best of intentions and the greatest of skill can still make mistakes unwittingly. This is not to condemn them or their efforts. It just happens. We need people to challenge and contrast with us. That will not in itself prevent mistakes or tragedies, but it serves as a system of checks and balances, if you will. It also exposes children to adults with different intellectual abilities and interests.
Now, maybe homeschooling parents take care to bring their children into contact with a variety of adults. I was concerned about those who do not. My comment wasn’t meant as an attack on homeschooling.
Diana Senechal
Diana,
My guess would be that homeschoolers are LESS likely to be abusive or neglectful. Why?
Because we are choosing, at great financial cost, to keep our children with us an extra 6-8 hours a day. If you can’t stand being around your kids and DON’T want to have to pay attention to them, why on Earth would you homeschool? After all, public school is free, and if you’re poor enough, they’ll even FEED the kids for you……
Obviously, there are some bad parents who choose to ‘homeschool.’ But I’d argue that a few bad parents is not an argument against homeschooling, any more than a few bad parents are an argument against allowing people to have kids!
Also, as far as CK and homeschooling go, I know many home-schoolers who WOULD send their kids to school if they could afford to send them to a school with a rigourous core curriculum, no serious discipline problems, and intelligent, teachers with subject-area knowledge.
But, for the most part, those schools tend to charge very high tuition…. home-schooling is the middle-class’s shot at an expensive private-school education!
I read this column the first time (before all the comments) and much of it resonated. I let my 13-yr daughter and 4 friends trick or treat by themselves in the immediate neighborhood and had people second guessing me afterwards…
But, as is often the case with magazines like Time, this is only a slice of the culture. I was at a meeting on youth violence last night, and a problem that the *kids* there brought up was “lack of supervision.” A particular issue that came up was elementary and middle school age kids being left in situations they found frightening — walking alone to school in bad neighborhoods was one example — and turning to gang affiliations as a means of protection.