- Léo’s Insights 2019-2020
- Léo’s Insights 2020-2021
- Léo’s Insights 2018-2019 Academic Year
Last week, I discussed how most parents see schools as daycares without serious regard for how and what schools are teaching their children.
Continuing our observations on how shuttering schools provided some interesting insights respecting learning, education and what schools have become, I would like to review a long-lasting concern respecting teaching children at home.
Since the beginning of the home education movement, the first objection made respecting teaching children at home has traditionally been a concern for the children’s opportunity for socialization.
What should have been very obvious when the schools were closed was that this decision suddenly made every student in the province equally susceptible to this ubiquitous concern for the home educated. While encouraging efforts at “social distancing,” it was not just those children who were already home educating who found themselves in need of “socialization”!
In light of what happened, it may perhaps be important to consider why this decision was made. Could it be that the schools closed in reaction to what socialization can do? Indeed, the closures took place because this all-important need for socialization was potentially dangerous to the children’s health!
To be fair, this was respecting their physical health, but still it clearly demonstrated that stereotypical school socialization may not be all that good, after all. Indeed, concerned parents most often cite socialization as the biggest reason for pulling students out of school in the first place, including not only their physical health, but their mental, academic, social and spiritual well-being, as well.
School may not be a healthy place. This thinking was shown to be accurate when schools shut down to prevent the spread of a virus during the pandemic.
We need to ask what else was prevented from spreading with this action? Conformity of thought? Learning without stimulation of interest? Bullying? Indoctrination into progressive ideology? Globalism? Secular humanism? Is this what is meant by socialization?
If anything, the voluntary quarantining of people quickly showed us just how social beings humans are. Although there were many negative consequences to the actions taken by the government, none had the impact that “social distancing” did.
Even the worst hermit must have grown tired of being isolated from others. It eventually demonstrated that people really need people. That’s because we were created for fellowship, not only with God, but with fellow human beings.
This is what compels many to have pets, which are, more often than not, treated as “little humans.” Ever notice how people talk the way they do to their pets? Have you ever questioned why? It boils down to our needing fellowship. We do need social interaction, or socialization, as is often pointed out.
Indeed, this social distancing exercise clearly demonstrated what home educators have known all along. Socialization is not something that needs to be developed, but rather an inherent human characteristic that is as natural as sneezing or scratching an itch.
What is needed to learn social skills is not programs or sequestering students in unnatural age specific environments, but rather, any opportunity to refine the practice with people of all ages and in all circumstances. Socialization skills have always been one of home education’s great strengths.