Abandoning the K­12 School System:Listening to Our Children and Thinking forOurselvesWednesday, 13 August 2014 10:06

By Jeffrey Nall (/author/itemlist/user/48385), Truthout (http://truth­out.org) | Op­Ed

Charlotte and Mimi Nall put together fair trade trick­or­treat handouts in the lead­up to Halloween,2013. (Photo: Jeffrey Nall)

Also see: Homeschooling for Critical Consciousness (http://truth­out.org/opinion/item/25507­homeschooling­for­critical­consciousness)

April [1] and I do not fit the stereotype of homeschooling parents. We are secular, feminist,egalitarians who believe in an open, just democratic society. We began homeschooling our twoeldest children, ages 11 and 10, in 2010. We did so because we found the dominant K­12 schoolsystem to be undemocratic, dehumanizing, and too often antithetical to our chosen educationalgoals for our children: to cultivate creative, compassionate critical thinkers.

Neither of us had seriously considered homeschooling our children until after we first enrolledour eldest daughter into kindergarten. The eventual decision to homeschool Charlotte and Julianwas an organic decision, one that was inspired by listening to our children and taking their

The eventual decision tohomeschool Charlotteand Julian was an organicdecision, one that was

concerns seriously. This kind of "radical" act subjects one to the scorn of many adults. Like allmarginalized and generally oppressed groups, children's desires, concerns and complaints areoften ignored or, when heard, trivialized.

Charlotte Nall, Julian Grover, Jeffrey Nall, and Mimi Nall pose for a photo during the family's visit toWashington DC for the “Stop the Machine” Occupy­solidarity protest, October 2011. (Photo: JeffreyNall)

Through countless hours of dialogue on parental philosophy and our core values, April and Iconcluded that we would do our best to remember that our children deserve more than food,shelter and love. They also deserved an appropriate level of respect and to be heard. So werefused to ignore it when our eldest daughter, then a kindergartner, complained of having norecess time, not being able to talk during lunch, rushed, joyless assignments that left herbewildered and regular headaches from being caught between screaming classmates and ateacher who responded by raising her voice and issuing collective discipline in attempts to regaincontrol of her class. After all, Charlotte went to kindergarten loving learning, but was beginningto hate anything associated with "education."

This would be the first of three schools our family triedover the course of some six years: first a public school,then an employee­ and parent­owned­and­operatedprivate school, then a different public school. Each hadunique features, but all shared qualities that

inspired by listening toour children and takingtheir concerns seriously.

contradicted our family's fundamental educationalvalues and, thus, compelled us to seek an alternativealong the way.

What We Learned and Why We Left

Both public schools utilized collective punishment. When Charlotte experienced such treatmentin kindergarten, she was left feeling ashamed for being publically disciplined. She was also bitterfor being held accountable for behavior she was not responsible for, an assertion her teachervalidated when confronted with the issue. In fourth grade, Julian's art teacher forced the entireclass to put their heads down for the entire period because a few of the students were disruptive.What made the punishment even worse was that it was his most anticipated class: art, which washeld once­a­week only. "If you're going to waste my time, then I'm going to waste your time," theteacher told him. The following day, I insisted on speaking to the vice principal. He said suchconduct was unacceptable. Yet similar tactics continued to be used by other instructors at theschool. I quickly developed the sense that I was faced with an institutional tactic of managingchildren, not a rogue and disorderly teacher.

All three schools required students to tolerate an unhealthy amount of passivity. Students wereagain and again expected to sit in stoic battalions of still, silent, attentive obedience while theteacher delivered a lesson they literally had no say in. Little to no time was allotted for studentquestions or open dialogue. In one instance, doodling on the corner of a completed worksheetwhile other children completed their own was disallowed and produced a public scolding. This isthe "banking" model of education Brazilian educator, theorist and activist Paulo Freire criticizedin Pedagogy of the Oppressed (http://www.pedagogyoftheoppressed.com/) (1968). In thisdehumanizing education model, "knowledge is a gift bestowed by those who consider themselvesknowledgeable upon those whom they consider to know nothing." [2] Freire argued that thebanking education model fostered passivity and compliance:

The more students work at storing the deposits entrusted to them, the less they develop thecritical consciousness which would result from their intervention in the world as transformersof that world. The more completely they accept the passive role imposed on them, the morethey tend to adapt to the world as it is and to the fragmented view of reality deposited inthem. [3]

This polarity of know­everything adults and know­nothing students was further entrenched byroutine displays of disrespect toward children. Members of the school staff of my son's lastschool routinely spoke to children in a condescending manner. In one instance, a child was lateto class and was waiting behind adults to sign herself in on the tardy list. One of the officeworkers barked, "Well, what are you doing? Get to class," followed by a snide scoff. When thechild explained that she was waiting to sign in, the office worker did not apologize or even extendan approving smile. Instead, the reaction was to ignore the entire exchange and go back to work.Children, no less than adults, experience such treatment as degrading.

This polarity of know‑everything adults andknow‑nothing studentswas further entrenchedby routine displays ofdisrespect towardchildren.

At the same school, students in my son's class who were underperforming or had forgotten anassignment would be publically chastised by the teacher before the entire class. His teacher eventhought it was unproblematic to eat cotton candy and donuts before a group of 9­year­oldstediously preparing for the FCAT, while enforcing an absolute ban on snacks during class time.An exception was made if you brought a piece of gum for her: Then you could chew a piece inclass. Also some students would be rewarded with some of the teacher's treats for outstandingwork.

All of this may seem trivial to adults. Yet this merelyindicates the adult­centered thinking that preventsadults from understanding the routine injusticesexperienced by children. All one needs to do is toimagine how it would feel to be similarly treated; howone feels when those with power ­ be they workplacemanagers, patriarchal males, or racists ­ unfairly andeven arbitrarily deprive those without it ­ workers,females, marginalized ethnic and/or religious groups.

Each of the schools not only failed to foster criticalthinking around the issue of gender stereotypes, they in fact served to reinforce them. As feministparents, April and I both work diligently to combat degrading, disempowering and ultimatelydestructive stereotypes of both our sons and daughters. Consequently, it was perpetuallyfrustrating to witness as they were pressured to conform to dominant gender stereotypes: whatinterests, toys, behavior counted as appropriate for "girls" or "boys." Though genderedboundaries were primarily policed by students, faculty members contributed to the problem byengaging in practices such as dividing children according to gender. This was done, for example,during recess. And it was experienced as an uncomfortable oddity by my daughter, who wasaccustomed to playing with all children, regardless of gender. Just her interest in playing withsome of her boy classmates was met with scorn by some of her female peers.

Subjected to an early, ubiquitous and uncritical gender socialization (http://truth­out.org/news/item/19626­unmasking­the­patriarchal­values­in­halloween­costumes) of theirown, children and, later, adults, are largely unaware of their active role in maintaining dominantgender norms. In addition to a lack of awareness of the social construction of gender, manyteachers, idealists and visionaries aside, are encouraged to embrace the role of dominantculture's deputy, tasked with fitting children to the world that is rather than promoting criticalanalysis and reimagining society. What is important to realize here is that learning, acquiringnew understanding, be it reasonable or not, occurs throughout everyday life. Classroom andschoolyard "educational" experiences such as those described above are formative, and warpchildren's sense of self­knowledge. Thus, however blameless teachers and children may be, agreat many play a regressive role in holding gender nonconformists accountable and maintainingthe inequity that is tied to patriarchal gender (http://truth­out.org/news/item/19316­boys­will­be­boys­how­valorizing­masculine­violence­is­killing­society).

Each of the schools notonly failed to fostercritical thinking aroundthe issue of genderstereotypes, they in factserved to reinforce them.

Add to these concerns the dehumanizing and counterproductive emphasis on competition andteaching to the test. Rather than encouraging each student to develop their intellectual potentialin diverse fields of study, students are in constant competition with one another. During Julian'sfourth grade experience, he was under perpetual pressure from his teacher to meet standardizedexpectations so that she "would not get in trouble" or so that she would be able to "maintain herreputation." An absurd yet indicative example of the emphasis on competition occurred when histeacher told him not to tell other students of the special writing formula she had developed forher students to ace a particular standardized test. If this sounds too absurd to be true, know thatthe teacher evaded the question all together when I directly brought it to her attention. For itseems that many teachers are simply not challenged on the practices they engage in behindclosed doors; perhaps parents are too busy, too overworked, and in some cases, it might also bethe case that they are too skeptical or inattentive to children's perspectives all together.

To this laundry list we could add the systemicdismissiveness of individual children's intellectual andcreative interests and talents. Sorely lacking in thecurriculum were study areas of critical concern to ourfamily: artistic creativity, opportunities for dialogue,teamwork and projects; appropriate attention to civicvirtues, including intellectual independence andvaluing the dignity of all persons; and an emphasis oncritical thinking ­ including questioning authority.

Progressive Criticism of Dominant Education System

These observations about competition and forced learning techniques are not new. AlbertEinstein criticized (http://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why­socialism) capitalism forinjecting an individuality­"crippling" competitiveness into the dominant education system. "Ourwhole educational system suffers from this evil. An exaggerated competitive attitude is inculcatedinto the student, who is trained to worship acquisitive success as a preparation for his futurecareer." Einstein further (http://books.google.com/books?id=sV8gdLunYo8C&pg=PA346&lpg=PA346&dq=This+coercion+had+such+a+deterring+effect+that,+after+I+had+passed+the+final+examination,+I+found+the+consideration+of+any+scientific+problems+distasteful+to+me+for+an+entire+year.&source#v=onepage&q=This%20coercion%20had%20such%20a%20deterring%20effect%20that%2C%20after%20I%20had%20passed%20the%20final%20examination%2C%20I%20found%20the%20consideration%20of%20any%20scientific%20problems%20distasteful%20to%20me%20for%20an%20entire%20year.&)criticized the coercive aspects of education. "One had to cram all this stuff into one's mind,whether one liked it or not," he wrote. Einstein concluded that "the modern methods ofinstruction" were responsible for strangling "the holy curiosity of inquiry" from those who were"mainly in need of freedom."

What our children experienced was really all too familiar. I loathed most of my K­12 experience,experiencing virtually everything my children experienced and more. I was bullied, made to feelintellectually inadequate, belittled by too many other students and teachers. I also felt robbed ofthe right to sufficiently pursue my interests, which often failed to coincide with standardizedcurriculum. I eventually dropped out of high school. The feeling of liberation was so great that itdrowned out my concerns with the stigma and criticism that comes with dropping out. When I

reluctantly began community college with a GED, I was surprised at how much easier college wascompared to compulsory schooling. Despite being a C student, I quickly began making "A"s and"B"s. Reflecting on this feeling now as a college professor with a PhD, I believe college seemedeasier because it was an instantly more humane, free space for thought and discussion. [4]

The conditions do not appear to have changed much since journalist and professor, Dr. CharlesSilberman, wrote his historic 1970 work, Crisis In The Classroom: The Remaking of AmericanEducation (http://books.google.com/books/about/Crisis_in_the_classroom.html?id=vC48AAAAIAAJ):

It is not possible to spend any prolonged period visiting public school classrooms withoutbeing appalled by the mutilation visible everywhere ­ mutilation of spontaneity, of joy inlearning, or pleasure in creating, or sense of self. . . . Because adults take the schools so muchfor granted, they fail to appreciate what grim, joyless places most American schools are, howoppressive and petty are the rules by which they are governed, how intellectually sterile andesthetically barren the atmosphere, what an appalling lack of civility obtains on the part ofteachers and principals, what contempt they unconsciously display for students as students.

Succinctly contextualizing these observations, Noam Chomsky contends(http://www.alternet.org/story/154849/chomsky:_how_the_young_are_indoctrinated_to_obey)that the aim of the dominant model of education has been to limit students' "perspectives andunderstanding, discourage free and independent thought, and train them for obedience." Onespecific purpose of mass public education, according to Chomsky, "was to prepare independentfarmers for life as wage laborers who would tolerate what they regarded as virtual slavery."

Responding to the oppressive design of the dominant education system, progressive educatorshave long sought to overthrow the banking model of education in favor of a humane, progressive,liberatory model. Inspired by Freire, one such educator, bell hooks, writes that progressiveeducators view education (http://books.google.com/books?id=On_HDLwpvpoC&pg=PA2­IA3&dq=as+the+practice+of+freedom+because+we+understand+that+democracy+thrives+in+an+environment+where+learning+is+valued,+where+the+ability+to+think+is+the+mark+of+responsible+citizenship,+where+free+speech+and+the+will+to+dissent+is+accepted+and+encouraged&hl=en&sa=X&ei=cdjnU82KErDlsASJ3oGIDA&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=as%20the%20practice%20of%20freedom%20because%20we%20understand%20that%20democracy%20thrives%20in%20an%20environment%20where%20learning%20is%20valued,%20where%20the%20ability%20to%20think%20is%20the%20mark%20of%20responsible%20citizenship,%20where%20free%20speech%20and%20the%20will%20to%20dissent%20is%20accepted%20and%20encouraged&f=false)"as the practice of freedom because we understand that democracy thrives in an environmentwhere learning is valued, where the ability to think is the mark of responsible citizenship, wherefree speech and the will to dissent is accepted and encouraged."

School environments where teachers can realistically overcome deeply lodged institutionalobstructions to such a model of teaching are few and far between. Yet organizations such as TheInstitute for Democratic Education in America (IDEA) are striving to bring humanity,imagination and democracy to schools. IDEA advocates for democratic education(http://democraticeducation.org/index.php/democratic­education/), defined "as learning thatequips every human being to participate fully in a healthy democracy," a vision that embraces theyoung "as active co­creators of their own learning" rather than "products of an educationsystem."

Democratically operated schools such as the Florida­based Sunset Sudbury School(http://sunsetsudbury.org/) in Davie and Grassroots School (http://www.grassrootsschool.org/)in Tallahassee provide teaching mentors but emphasize student­guided and motivated learningas well as creativity, and social interconnectivity. The radically unstructured character(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlQ6nmnZV8A) of these schools arguably lacks somenecessary adult­led direction. Yet their embrace of democratic practices provides a creativealternative to what Henry Giroux calls the "pedagogy of repression (http://www.truth­out.org/opinion/item/18133­when­schools­become­dead­zones­of­the­imagination­a­critical­pedagogy­manifesto)": the dominant practice of education entailing the indoctrination ofstudents to accept that rights belong only to the powerful and "unlearn any respect fordemocracy, justice, and what it might mean to connect learning to social change." This ispowerfully reflected in the conflict resolution (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuOHZ­llwyg) approach of the Sudbury Valley School of Framingham, Massachusetts.

Such options are not available to everyone. In the first place very few such institutions exist.Secondly, these community­based schools are not free. Tuition ranges from as much as $6,000for the first child at Sunset, to a sliding scale based on taxable income minus taxes divided by .09at Grassroots (http://www.grassrootsschool.org/wp­content/uploads/2012/10/Fee­Schedule­version­6­11­14.pdf). Though it is reasonable compared to operational costs, tuition of anyamount is a barrier for most low­income families. Ideally such examples would be embraced bythe public school system.

The present anti­democratic reality of most US schools is clear. In its 2003 report, "US Teens inOur World (http://mchb.hrsa.gov/mchirc/_pubs/us_teens/main_pages/ch_4.htm)," USDepartment of Health and Human Services found that nearly 80 percent of 15­year­old USstudents "like school only a little, not very much, or not at all." What makes school sointolerable? "US students are among the least likely to feel that they participate in making rulesat school or that rules are fair. This sense of lack of participation in rule making and unfairnessgets worse as students grow older. US students of all ages also are among the least likely to feelthat their classmates are kind and helpful." The consequences for such lack of participation, thereport explains, is clear: "Not only are students who feel unconnected more likely to abusesubstances, engage in violence, and become pregnant, but they may be less likely to acquiredevelopmental assets and to experience opportunities to demonstrate competence throughincreasing autonomy appropriate to their developmental stage." [5]

Who is John Holt? The Radically Progressive Roots of US Homeschooling

As April and I sought an alternative quite apart from those of fundamentalist religiousinspiration, we encountered radical homeschool pioneer, John Holt. Holt's ideals and objectiveswere in many ways opposite of religious fundamentalists. Inspired by his empathetic experienceteaching fifth grade students, Holt authored How Children Fail (1964), in which he asserted, asPatrick Farenga explains it, that forced learning centered on pleasing educational authorityfigures and pursuing institutional benchmarks and rewards makes children "unnaturally self­

conscious about learning and stifles children's initiative and creativity . . ." [6] He was initiallywell­received by some institutions, and was invited to lecture at Harvard and Berkeley andappear on mainstream TV programs. But he quickly proved himself to be a remarkablyplainspoken subversive who made almost everyone uncomfortable, but probably none more thanreligious "family value" conservatives.

Holt became a pedagogical anarchist: He abandoned the possibility of reforming the existing K­12 education system and began working for change at a grassroots level outside of thesystem. Holt's aim in promoting homeschooling was to liberate children from what he saw asamong the most authoritarian, humanity­depriving institutions of all human creations:compulsory education. Quite apart from the many conservatives who identify withhomeschooling today, Holt viewed compulsory education as an institution that robbed childrenof what he saw as the most fundamental of all freedoms: the freedom of thought. In hiscontroversial work, Escape from Childhood: The Needs and Rights of Children (1974), Holtwrote

"No human right, except the right to life itself, is more fundamental than this. A person'sfreedom of learning is part of his freedom of thought, even more basic than his freedom ofspeech. If we take from someone his right to decide what he will be curious about, we destroyhis freedom of thought." [7]

Conclusion

Summed up, we abandoned formal schooling because we believe it inhumanely and destructivelydeprives children of the opportunity to develop their unique intelligence; emphasizes extremecompetitiveness and independence at the expense of respectful, compassionate social connectionand appropriate recognition of interdependence; and the system prefers to emphasize dogmaticconformity at the expense of critical, compassionate, creative consciousness.

Jeffrey and April Nall pose for selfies, April 2011 (Photo: Nall Family)

Today, April and I are deeply committed to the common good and educating ourselves and ourchildren about the importance of fairness, moral equality, environmental stewardship, personalresponsibility, and the duties of citizenship. Our decision to homeschool, to a significant degree,is driven by the failure of the dominant school system to enact these very values.

Footnotes

[1] Thanks to April Nall for reading, commenting and contributing to the development of theideas in this essay.

[2] Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, (New York: Continuum, 2000), 72.

[3] Freire, Pedagogy, 73.

[4] To be clear, none of this means that I did not have a couple of very good teachers. One inparticular stands out for giving me a backpack of books to read as I abandoned school. Once outof school, I read these books, which included Upton Sinclair's The Jungle, with great enthusiasm.The point is simply that good teachers are necessary but not sufficient for a good schoolexperience.

[5] Thanks to April Nall for bringing this study(http://mchb.hrsa.gov/mchirc/_pubs/us_teens/main_pages/ch_4.htm) to my attention.

[6] John Holt, Instead of Education: Ways to Help People Do Things Better, (New York: E.P.

Dutton & Co. Inc., 1976), 218.

[7] John Holt, Escape from Childhood: The Needs and Rights of Children (New York: E.P.Dutton & Co., Inc., 1974) 240­241. Radically, Holt lays claim to children's right to that mostcherished of enlightenment ideals, freedom of thought. Similarly, in 1670, the philosophicalpioneer of European freethought, Spinoza, wrote "a government that attempts to control men'sminds is regarded as tyrannical, and a sovereign is thought to wrong his subjects and infringetheir right when he seeks to prescribe for every man what he should accept as true and reject asfalse." Tractatus Theologico­Politicus or A Theologico­Political Treatise, p.222

Copyright, Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission (mailto:editor@truthout.org).

JEFFREY NALL (/AUTHOR/ITEMLIST/USER/48385)

Jeffrey Nall holds a master's of liberal studies from Rollins College and a Ph.D. from Florida AtlanticUniversity. He is an adjunct professor at two colleges where he teaches philosophy, critical thinking andgender studies. Nall is the author of Feminism and the Mastery of Women and Childbirth: an EcofeministExamination of the Cultural Maiming and Reclaiming of Maternal Agency During Childbirth(http://www.jeffreynall.com/woman­made.html) (Academica Press, 2014). He can be reached atwww.jeffreynall.com (http://www.jeffreynall.com/).RELATED STORIES

Education as “Politically Contested Spaces” (/opinion/item/6881)By Paul Thomas, The Daily Censored (http://dailycensored.com/2012/02/22/education­as­politically­contested­spaces/) | Op­EdEducation in the Name of Social Transformation: Teaching Workers (/opinion/item/22439)By Michael D. Yates, Counterpunch (http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/02/27/teaching­workers/) | Op­EdAcademia Under the Influence (/opinion/item/22589)By Eleanor J. Bader, Truthout (http://truth­out.org) | Book Review

Show Comments