How did education change in history from being family based?

If there is one truth that cannot be changed is that homeschooling is indeed all about family.

Home schooling; although providing its students with an education of high academic quality; certainly has nothing to do with bringing the conventional school model into the home.

If conventional schooling was a desired commodity people would go voluntary, there would be no need to "force" them to go. (compulsory attendance).

--Quote-- Carl Rogers:

"If we value independence, if we are disturbed by the growing conformity of knowledge, of values, of attitudes, which our present system induces, then we may wish to set up conditions of learning which make for uniqueness, for self-direction, and for self-initiated learning."

If interested, the following two books make for some informative reading on this subject:

Home Education, Rights and Reasons

by: John W. Whitehead and Alexis Irene Crow

N.E.A. Trojan Horse In American History

by: Samuel L. Blumenfeld.

The New England Puritans valued education, both for the sake of religious study (which was facilitated by Bible reading) and for the sake of economic success. A 1647 Massachusetts law mandated that every town of 50 or more families support an elementary school and every town of 100 or more families support a grammar school, where boys could learn Latin in preparation for college.

The church has a history of taking select boys in for alterboy training and learning to read the Bible.

This tradition goes back to Blbilcal times where young boys were trained to read the Torah in preparation for manhood (age 14) when they could regularly participate in the Synnagog.

This is where Jesus was probably trained in Hebrew, plus he had to learn Greek and Aramatic to get along in Paletine which was previoiusly occupied by the Greeks and had a lot of Arabs. Rome was now in Charge, but they used Greek not Latin to communicate with the Arabs and JEws.

The first intitute of higher learning in the US was established jointly by the clergy and government in the form of a placed called Harvard, which was probably known as Harvard School, but not yet given the title of College until Europe accepted it as such. Then it became Harvard College and finally with a series of colleges Harvard University.

Yale was also set up this way.

Then secular government took over much of the public education starting in the 1800s. By 1900 manditory education was found throughout the united states with minimal standards for teachers.

Starting in the 1900s all sorts of things became "regulated" including schools, teaching, medicine, denstry, psychiatry, nursing, engineering, etc.

The most recent things to become regulated include Psychiatric Social work (in the 1960s), EMT and Para Medic (in the 1970s) and Nurse Practioner (in the 1980s and 1990s).

Regulation and uniformity between states was felt a good yard stick to prevent quakery and protect the lives of the public who often believe whatever the sign above the door says.

People could only go to a Church situation if that Church had a formal school which met with the state requirements.

The in the 1970s or 1980s a Scientist and his scientist wife living in Rural Washington or Oregon decided to teach their son at home and were taken to court by the state. They won and states had to recoginze the legitimacy of a "home school."

These two parents, you must understand, between them had over 10 years of college education and professional experience. But they did not have state Teaching credentials.

The one responder's mention of ancient Greeks was referring specifically to the Spartans, I believe. They essentially held the attitude that the people belonged to the government and everybody should be brought up to achieve 'perfection' in order to create the best military force. That's not exactly the world we live in right now!

Looking at what I know of education in history, which may admittedly lack things here and there, there is evidence in places like Greece of people (I think always boys and young men) *choosing* to go be educated under men who were seen as wise. This was more of a mentorship, a choice of finding someone who knew more to learn more. Not quite the same idea as the local schools.

In North America and in England at least, schools would pop up in communities as means for some children to be educated while the parents were busy with other things. The more children went, the more it seemed wise to send them. Of course, they had a very different setup than today's community schools: the children typically brought their own books for whatever level they were capable of and worked at their own pace, one-room schoolhouse with lots of different ages... Some schools were also private schools where the well-to-do parents would pay while they were doing other things. In many cases, this became a sign of prestige. (Still is!) There were also religious-based schools as well that children were sent to in order to be in the religious orders as adults. And, of course, there were the well-to-do families who would hire private tutors to instruct their children at home. These were typically families, though, where the children were not really raised by their parents but by nurses and governesses.

The majority of people, though, taught their children at home. Yes, there were many who could not read and write. However, given a lifestyle of farming, reading and writing didn't really matter much. Knowing how to raise animals and tend to fields did. But many did read and write and know basic math. The shift from this changed when the governments started feeling like they were responsible for children. By making schooling mandatory and in many cases, requiring children to actually go to school, the government essentially started treating children as its property of the state. This probably still would have been okay if the one-room schoolhouse, which is much more like a family than the single-age groupings today, had been retained, but it wasn't and school hours have been made increasingly longer.

Basically, the current model of public school is probably the greatest thing contributing to the modern family's demise.

In the US, it was in the 1850s when compulsory schooling laws were enacted in Massachusetts. People weren't too happy with it; the kids had to be marched to school under an armed guard. Within about 20 years, the rest of the country followed.

It's the compulsory nature of schooling that bothers me. The Romans did fine without it. They had schools, places to learn, and teachers, but it wasn't a market, and it wasn't compulsory. They would have been revolted at the mere thought: forced training was for slaves.

Classism and the Industrial Revolution played a big part. The jobs available were factory jobs, and people didn't want the new waves of immigrants to come and mix with their children. To that end, schools were designed to take the children of immigrants and train them to be obedient factory workers, dependent on an outside authority, who knew their place.

Now the problem is that compulsory-schooling propaganda has made it seem like they're doing everything they aren't. You can't be taught to teach yourself. You can't be taught independence. You can't be trained to be open-minded. But the poisonous seed was planted. People now think that everything must be handed over to someone else with a special piece of paper saying that they Know.

Even with all that, though, parents who send their kids to school love them and want the best for them, and people do have good times in school. It's not black and white.

America has adopted the German model of education and has run with it. Our government does what all governments seek to do...control people. The educational system is the most effective way to control future generations. When we had an influx of immigrants from Europe who were mainly Catholic, the public education sytem was one way to get control of the next generation. We now have public schools indoctrinating children. Our public school sytem is failing but it continues to demand our children be turned over to them at ever younger ages. They also "expand services" with before school and after school programs, school doctors, psychologists, counselors, case workers, etc. All of this diminishes the American family, which is crumbling before our eyes.

when the gov got into it and thought people who could not afford to home educate needed to at least learn how to read and write...add, subtract...(about the industrial revolution)...god forbid poor people can read and write. we might be more like mexico where only the people with money and influence educate their kids. we might even have a class of even more eletist, racist, and or supremacist people........in this particular case...the gove had a good idea, but it has been bogged down.....

What an interesting take!

Home schooling existed until social structures made it convenient to share the burden. This would also increase available information.

Even in the animal world some species use group education.

The world would be a different place if Plato's education came from his family only.

One thing won't change. There is no solution or method that is right for everyone.

I don't know what you are talking about, the idea of taking the family out of the picture when schooling the young has been around since pre-history.

The Greeks used to make it mandatory (the Athenians and Spartans) for their children to actually leave home for years to be educated before returning to their families. Those societies produced some of the most intelligent human beings ever to live.

If anything the family has an adverse effect on objective education, especially considering the interference that parents may present when pressuring teachers and staff to 'favor' their children over others.

You're living in a false reality if you think 'family nurturing and life choices' can substitute for independent thought and critical analysis without parent interference.