I was committed to the idea from the early 70’s when I attended Teachers College in Ottawa and found that British legislation referred to the DUTY of parents to secure an appropriate education for their children. That public schools were available for them or they could have them educated “otherwise”.

I attended CIDOC, Cuernavaca, Mexico 1971-72 where Ivan Illich held forth on his ideas of deschooling society and attracted wide international audiences.

One important attendee and speaker was John Holt. At tea one day, John, who knew I had two young children with me, ages 3 and 5, asked if I would be enrolling them in school soon. I said I might educate them at home.

He thought this was illegal, but I said I found from my readings at Teachers College that the “otherwise” clause in most Education Acts allowed it.

He then commented that at least I would be qualified to do it, having obtained a teaching certificate. Again, I enlightened him with the fact that this was not a requirement.

He then posed the thoughtful but predictable question about socialization, and we chatted about the various community opportunities available.

His parting comment was: “Smart City!”

John Holt at that time had written several books and had a newsletter going for fans. Using his mailing list he soon started a new publication, “Growing Without Schools” and was thus able to reach a wide audience and spread the word about the exciting concepts of “deschooling” and home education. Meanwhile, Dr. Raymond Moore was spreading the word amongst his mainly Christian audience.

In 1983 I produced the 1st Home Learning Fair in BC, followed by 4 other annual events. In l987 I wrote the article: Home Education: The Third Option for a prestigious educational journal which further advanced and affirmed the movement amongst educators and public alike. At the same time, in Canada, Wendy Priesnitz, was promoting the idea of unschooling in Eastern Canada.

NOW, I think it is time to prepare an article on the Benefits to Society which I hinted at in my 1987 article:

Benefits to society

For people in policy or advocacy positions it is also necessary to see the general good that flows from home education–apart from the benefits to family and child. While a separate article would better describe this dimension, the following points touch on some of the values to society.

The statutory requirement is met…

It’s an antidote to the heavy intrusion of the state in our lives…

Demystification follows naturally from deinstitutionalization…

The lag between theory and practice can be considerably shortened in home education…

Choice is worthy of support in any democracy…

I will jot my thoughts on this topic via Comments, and hope readers can also contribute to: Home Education: Benefits to Society

Tunya Audain

Dec08/06 jottings on Benefits

- bypass politics (at school level, parents told what can/can’t do, volunteers have been called
scabs”/ Kids told what can/can’t do, can’t pick up garbage, litter in hallways, janitor’s job. 3) Parents told school events to be limited, privately principal says he doesn’t think parents should have opportunities to compare notes, complaints.

- Lieberman, In Autopsy book, talks about the three sector industry, public, private, non-profit sectors. We really should be talking about 4 sectors to include home education.

- Hoops, put-offs, stonewalling, diversions, lip-service. Not allowed to complain to ombudsman.

- trustees say we are the representatives of parents. Parents treated as just another lobby group, “put on a dinner for us, like the teachers union, and we will listen to your input.”