[Spyro7]

"I understand that sheltering them from the real world is not your motivation for this opinion, but it is the reality of what will happen. Your kids will miss out on a huge period of personal growth and a large expansion of their experience dealing with other people which they will never be able to get back later."

It is not necessarily the case that being homeschooled automatically equates to a child that has been sheltered from the real world. In reality, whether or not a child has missed out due to homeschooling depends heavily on the parents that are doing the homeschooling. A parent can homeschool their child and simulate a private school by integrating classes (with groups of children) from museums, libraries, and independent instructors. A parent can also homeschool their child by putting on a DVD and walking away.

I was homeschooled from pre-kindergarten through 12th grade. My parents relied on a lot of external classes to ensure that I was still able to develop the ability to interact with others. The reality for me was that I was able to have a far richer social environment as a result of my being homeschooled. By the time that I entered college, I had interacted with far more cultures and personality types than most of those around me. I went on to successfully complete my undergraduate and graduate degrees.

When I was homeschooled, I kept in contact with a small handful of friends that were also homeschooled. They all went on to do just fine in both college and in life. I realize that my experiences and those of my peers are anecdotal, but a study performed by the Discovery Institute in 2000 also provided evidence that there is no "sheltering" involved with most homeschools: http://www.discovery.org/a/3479

(Please note, I actually take issue with a few things in the Discovery Institute study, but I think that it does provide some degree of evidence that homeschooling does not automatically result in a maladjusted child.)

In my economics courses, we would sometimes take a look at the economic returns of education. I always found it strangely comical when someone would speak harshly about how homeschoolers are "sheltered" and then turn to me for moral support. It was always such a shock to everyone to hear that I had been homeschooled for my entire life. Some people even called me a liar outright. (I have always wondered what is it about homeschooling that seems to rub people the wrong way?)

I am well-spoken, outgoing, and have an easy time dealing with people. I do not say this (or anything else in this post) braggingly, but I say it to give credit to my parents for what their sacrifices were able to accomplish for me. You say that "sheltering" is the "reality" of what will happen, but how are you so sure of this?

I believe that the results of homeschooling, much like other forms of schooling, is a product of the teacher, the student, and the approach. I do not disagree that sometimes, with homeschooling, some children are not able to develop social skills. What I disagree with, strongly, is your insinuation that "sheltering is the reality of homeschool". Homeschooling a child does not automatically mean that the child will struggle socially.

[driverdan]

You seriously just cited something from the Discovery Institute, a group that believes a book trumps scientific evidence? They have a strong agenda that includes homeschooling. The article you cited is not research, it's an internally created, non-peer reviewed meta review. Not exactly high quality material.

I'm not saying your argument is necessarily wrong, just that you found some of the worst possible material to support it.

[Spyro7]

My apologies.

I never intended anyone to take the Discovery Institute paper as anything more than just a casual study of the subject (by a biased party). I certainly did not want to present it as academically rigorous on any level or as an unbiased look at the subject.

I thought that I had made this clear in my original post by using the word "study" rather than "research" or "peer-reviewed study". I really meant for it to be taken as more of a narrative account than an actual research paper. Unfortunately, it is now far too late for me to amend my original post to make this more clear.

In my defense, I typed up my post in a blaze of coffee-fueled self-righteous indignation. Mistakes tend to happen a lot when you shoot from the hip like that.

[bermanoid]

Were you homeschooled for religious reasons, though? Because especially in certain areas, many homeschooled kids are in that situation only because their parents believe the public school system will force them to believe unacceptable things: the gay agenda, evolution, Jesus wasn't an American, etc.

It's that kind of homeschooling that rubs people the wrong way, because it is specifically motivated by a desire to shelter rather than educate (it's also precisely the reason the Discovery Institute cares about this issue at all; they don't want kids growing up in a system that normalizes homosexuality, religious diversity, or an evidence-based worldview). Most of the bizarrely maladjusted homeschooled kids that I knew came out of these types of situations (though that's not to say that all kids coming out of religiously motivated homeschooling were socially inept).

When parents homeschool because they actually think their kids will learn more effectively, that's a much more positive situation that I have no problem with.