What
about Socialization
Every
parent who makes a decision to home school can be assured that they
are going to hear the dreaded "S" word. "What about socialization?"
Often that's the extent of the question. Sometimes there is elaboration.
It seems to me that there are 3 basic implications in the question.
- Socialization
is necessary.
- Socialization
is good.
- To
be properly socialized, children must spend large amounts of
time with their peers.
Before
dealing with these assumptions, let's first consider one important
question: "What is socialization?" I looked it up in my The
Reader's Digest Great Encyclopaedic Dictionary. 'Socialization'
is the noun form of the verb 'socialize.'
Socialize
- To
place under group or government control; especially, to
regulate according to socialist principles.
- To
convert from an antisocial to a social attitude; make friendly,
cooperative, or sociable.
- To
convert or adapt to the needs of a social group.
- To
take part in social activities.
Let's
consider the answers to the implications of the socialization
question for each of these definitions separately.
- To
place under group or government control; especially, to regulate
according to socialist principles.
- Socialization
is necessary. ABSOLUTELY NOT!! This form of socialization
is in direct opposition to the ideals of freedom and independence
on which the United States was founded. Scripturally this
is also unacceptable. Nowhere in scripture does it tell
parents to give control of their children over to the government
or any other group.
- Socialization
is good. Again, ABSOLUTELY NOT!! We do not need, nor
should we want, a nation full of children who think exactly
alike and behave exactly alike. I truly believe that our
current forms of government education are designed to pour
all of the children into the same mold. Our government school
system is patterned after the German system that was used
to produce the "good German" citizens that helped bring
us World War I and World War II.
- To
be properly socialized, children must spend large amounts
of time with their peers. This one is certainly true.
If this is the kind of 'socialization' we are seeking then
keeping children in groups of children is the best way to
do it. Separated from adult influence children are more
likely to be moulded into the form the government desires.
- To
convert from an antisocial to a social attitude; make friendly,
cooperative, or sociable.
- Socialization
is necessary. When raised properly, most children will
grow up fairly friendly, cooperative and sociable. So putting
kids in some artificial setting for this purpose is unnecessary.
- Socialization
is good. When not raised properly, or when for other
reasons children become unfriendly, uncooperative and unsociable,
it is a good thing to try to reverse that pattern.
- To
be properly socialized, children must spend large amounts
of time with their peers. Being around other children
is not going to help with this kind of socialization. If
a large number of children are together, it is typically
the bad examples that are followed rather than the good
examples. One of the strongest memories I have of my government
school socialization is hiding behind the building during
lunch so I wouldn't be beaten up by the school bullies.
That was not helping me or anyone else become friendly,
cooperative or sociable. Indeed, much time is spent in government
schools in trying to help students resist peer pressure.
What is peer pressure if not the 'socialization' that government
schools provide?
- To
convert or adapt to the needs of a social group.
- Socialization
is necessary. Yes, it is necessary that children learn
to adapt their behaviours in order to meet the needs of
many social groups. The family only functions well when
all members convert or adapt to the needs of the family.
The church only functions well when all members convert
or adapt to the needs of the church. The country only functions
well when all members convert or adapt to the needs of the
country.
- Socialization
is good. It depends entirely on what the needs of the
group are and who defines those needs. If the "needs" of
the group are independent thinking, responsible adults,
then, yes, socialization is good. If the "needs" of the
group are likeminded automatons, then, no, socialization
is not good.
- To
be properly socialized, children must spend large amounts
of time with their peers. Again, constant exposure to
the immaturities and abuses of other children does not effectively
bring about the good aspects of this form of socialization.
Peer pressure brings conformity, not individuality. And
it brings conformity in superficial or harmful ways. Everyone
dressing the same and piercing body parts the same does
nothing to help family, church or country. Being pressured
into using tobacco, alcohol or drugs does nothing to help
family, church or country.
- To
take part in social activities.
- Socialization
is necessary. In this form, socialization is not only
necessary, but unavoidable unless one chooses to become
a hermit. Going to church is a social activity. Going to
the grocery store is a social activity. Every time we come
into contact with other people we are participating in social
activities.
- Socialization
is good. Yes, this kind of socialization is good so
long as the social activity is not destructive to mind,
body, spirit or property.
- To
be properly socialized, children must spend large amounts
of time with their peers. Since most social activities
that people will encounter in life are not exclusively with
children, it is not helpful if the majority of their social
activities as children are exclusively with children.
Clearly
there is positive socialization and negative socialization.
Yes, children do need positive socialization. They do not need
negative socialization.
Let's
examine what would be classified as "Positive Socialization."
Let us also consider whether these traits are more likely to
be instilled in a government school environment or in a home
school environment.
- Learning
how to get along with people. By this, I mean learning how
to get along with a variety of people of diverse backgrounds
in diverse situations. The artificial, age-segregated government
school classroom does not afford any such opportunity. All that
children learn there is how to interact with the same 25 or
so children of the same age, with one adult thrown in as a balance.
In a home school, in addition to the classroom learning, children
will often accompany their parents during errands and chores
during the day. They will encounter people at the grocery store,
hardware store, post office and all of the other settings that
they will encounter throughout life. They will see people of
all ages and all backgrounds. They will see them in all kinds
of situations. Clearly, if you want a child who will grow up
knowing how to interrelate with a wide range of people then
home schooling is the best choice. Home school wins.
- Learning
how to treat people with respect. I attended government
school. I do not recall my interaction with my peers as a positive
force in learning to treat people with respect. I recall slower
students being called "retard." I recall people with acne being
viciously ridiculed. I recall children from poor families being
ridiculed for not having the best clothes. I recall smart children
being ridiculed for being smart. I recall children being beaten
up for no reason. I may be missing something but that doesn't
seem to me a good way of teaching children to treat people with
respect. When children are the primary source of socialization
then childish values will be transmitted. Mature adults are
necessary to teach the proper values. A government school teacher
with a classroom of 25 or more children can not overcome and
counteract all of the negative behaviour of the students. A
home educated child is in constant contact with an adult who
can give careful attention to the behaviour of the child, reinforcing
the good and correcting the bad. Home school wins again.
- Learning
to conform to standards of good behaviour What standards
of behaviour are learned through contact with children? Good
ones or bad? Watch a group of children. Does the behaviour of
the crowd get more greatly influenced by the example of the
good child or the badly behaved child? Crowds tend to follow
the lowest examples. I honestly think this is why so many churches
see their youth begin to rebel and walk away as they reach their
teens. The positive training that took place in the home and
church during the formative years gets worn away by constant
exposure to the negative behaviour of government school classmates.
Jonathan Lindvall deals with this VERY well. He points out that
in scripture we are told that "foolishness is bound in the heart
of a child." (Proverbs 22:15) So when a child gets his main
interaction from other children then he grows up as a companion
of fools. Those who get their main interaction from fools grow
up to be fools. Home school wins again.
Now,
let's examine what would be classified as "Negative Socialization."
Let us also consider whether these traits are more likely to
be instilled in a government school environment or in a home
school environment.
- Developing
peer dependence. We all naturally want the approval of those
around us. Children who are in government school are around
other children most of the time. Therefore they look to other
children for their main source of approval. In order to gain
the approval of a group, it is necessary to conform to the behaviours
and norms of that group. Thus, government school children, by
the very nature of the design of government school, will grow
up dependent on their peers for approval. It doesn't really
matter that they are eventually told to "resist peer pressure."
That would be like putting a child in a room filled with candy
and letting them eat all they want. Then a few years later you
start telling them not to eat it. The habits are developed and
will not easily be changed. In home education, the primary source
of approval is the family. The family values and behaviour are
transmitted. Those values are dictated and patterned by the
parents. Home school wins again.
- Drug
abuse. Alcohol abuse. Tobacco use. Profanity. Promiscuous sex.
Other anti-social behaviour. The standards of the group
become the standards of the individuals in the group. If a child
is constantly in a place where these behaviours are exhibited
then the child is likely to participate in them or at least
view them as acceptable even though they are not. How many of
us have heard "good" kids use bad language? If they hear it
enough they become accustomed to it. It they become accustomed
to it they become accepting of it. If they become accepting
of it they start using it. In a home where those behaviours
are not accepted or exhibited then the children are much less
likely to accept or exhibit those behaviours. Home school
wins again.
- Cliques.
There is nothing wrong with having a close group of friends.
However, there is something badly wrong when the attitude becomes
that of a clique. That attitude is "If you're not one of us
you are nobody." All of us who attended government schools remember
cliques. Some of us were in them. Some of us were not. In neither
case does the child benefit. The government schools, with the
patterns of behaviour discussed above, are a fertile breeding
ground for cliques. Home school wins again.
Government
school provides virtually nothing of positive value to the socialization
of children. What little it does provide is more than outweighed
by the negatives that come with it. Home education is a far
superior method for developing a mature, responsible, law abiding
adult.
Yes,
some children do go to government school and come out as fine
young adults. But that is IN SPITE OF the government school
socialization, not BECAUSE OF it.
Now
let's consider some other specific objections to home schooling
that are related to the socialization question.
Objection
- Your child won't know how to interact with people of different
backgrounds.
Answer
- Very few home schoolers teach their children in a vacuum.
Most attend church, play in little league or do other things
that bring them into contact with people from other economic,
social or racial backgrounds. They encounter those people in
varied situations. They encounter people of more diverse backgrounds
since they are not spending all day in an age segregated environment.
Additionally,
they may even be more likely to develop friendships with people
of different backgrounds since they won't need to deal with
the peer pressure to conform to the behaviour of "their" group.
Objection
- Your children will be sheltered.
Answer
- Children are supposed to be sheltered. That is the whole purpose
behind parenting. If a toddler tries to put his hand on the
burner on the stove, we stop him. That is not "sheltering."
It is protecting the child. When children are protected from
the negative influences so prevalent in the government schools,
they will grow up more emotionally healthy. They will grow up
more firmly established in the values of their parents. That
way, when they do need to make value decisions later in life,
they will have a firmer base on which to make their decisions.
When banks train tellers to recognize counterfeit money, they
do not show them counterfeit money. They make them very familiar
with real money. Then, when they see counterfeit money, they
will know it is not real. Likewise, if children are immersed
in positive values they will be more able to recognize negative
values later.
Also,
from what are they being sheltered? Gang violence. Drugs. Bullies.
The latest educational fads. Ungodly philosophies. Immoral sex
education. They are not ready to be exposed to those things
and therefore they shouldn't be. We don't ridicule a florist
for keeping a young, tender plant in a green house to shelter
it from things it can not handle. Why should parents be ridiculed
for shelter young, tender children?
Objection
- Your children won't know how to deal with the real world.
Answer
- I have never been in a situation, outside of government school,
where everyone in the group is the same age and is forced to
do the same things. I have always been in groups of people of
various ages. Age segregation is not the "real world." In the
"real world," people who can excel are not held back until the
people who are slower catch up. That is how things are done
in government schools.
Objection
- Your children will grow to be too dependent on you.
Answer
- A little more dependence is a healthy thing. We see too many
children who are disrespectful of parents and all authority.
As they get older they care less about their parents and families.
Close knit families and consideration for others are things
that are necessary for a strong, stable society. Everyone needs
something or someone to depend on. Better that the child depend
on his parents and the values that will be passed down in such
a relationship than depend on the government and its values.
Objection
- Your child will be lonely or not have any friends.
Answer
- It is true that home school parents might have to go to a
little more effort to give their children opportunities to meet
other children. But it is also true that with the government
schools not being a factor, the parent is better able to monitor
the kinds of friendships that their children develop. Since
home schoolers tend to be active in church, clubs, etc. their
children are not likely to lack for contact with their peers.
Many homeschoolers are active in home school support groups.
Those groups provide further social activities.
Objection
- The child will be socially stigmatised.
Answer
- Differences are usually criticized out of ignorance or jealousy.
To combat this, simply help the child to realize that what is
being done is good for her.
Objection
- The child will not be able to interact when swapping stories
about school once he has grown.
Answer
- This is not true at all. The home schooled child will have
his own stories to share. There are many other home schooled
children so there will be many other children with similar experiences.
Further, in my experience, such swapping of stories in society
is rare. Typically, the stories swapped are negative in nature.
Objection
- Your kids are socially younger than their government school
peers and this is due to the fact that they aren't in government
schools.
Answer
- Home school children will not be forced to act more mature
than they really are to try to protect themselves from being
mocked. They are permitted to enjoy their childhood by not being
exposed to things that rob them of their youth and innocence.
They will not be forced to become prematurely independent. Independence
will come after they have developed the moral and emotional
maturity to handle it.
My
experience shows me that home schooled children tend to be more
respectful, more self-confident, more mature and more capable
than government school children.
Objection
- The kids won't be able to learn how to fail or succeed in
front of other people.
Answer
- They will fail or succeed in front of their teacher just like
government school children do. They will fail and succeed in
front of their friends, siblings and family members. In home
school, however, the failures are not going to be ridiculed
by others, causing the children to become less likely to take
risks.
Also,
most people do not home school in a vacuum. Home school children
typically participate in church activities, little league, etc.
Copyright
1997 - Fred Worth - Permission is hereby granted to reproduce or
distribute this material as long as it is unedited and provided
free of charge.
|