A new survey indicates that 1.1 million children are home schooled. As with many deviations from the norm, the Aug. 3 Associated Press article regarding home schooling left the reader with an incomplete and somewhat misleading understanding of home schooling. Ted Feinberg, assistant director of the National Association of School Psychologists, referred to home-schooled children as lacking in interaction “with the rest of the world,” locked away in their “cloistered environment.”

In reality, this educational alternative is, in fact, the oldest form of instruction in this country; paradoxically, contemporary society understands it the least. Most view home schooling – the choice for a burgeoning number of dissatisfied families – as a developmentally unsound gamble and an irresponsible and irrevocable mistake on the part of the parents. However, opponents of home schooling tend to base such opinions on myths and misconceptions; accordingly, the following argument attempts to demystify home schooling in response to three common, but misguided, notions about its merit.

Myth 1: Traditional schools sufficiently educate our child and meet our family’s needs. First, this notion indirectly acknowledges that home schooling might indeed benefit the child more than public school, yet it simultaneously tosses aside the possibility of choosing home schooling because public school is apparently “good enough.”

Considering that, as Laurence Steinberg notes in “Adolescence,” one in four students eventually drop out of public schools, that only 50 percent of traditional high school graduates go on to complete college, and that home schoolers, in comparison, average between the sixty-fifth and ninetieth percentiles on achievement tests administered to both traditional and nontraditional students. It is becoming glaringly clear that public schools do not sufficiently meet the needs of all children.

Myth 2: Zealously religious families frantically turn to home schooling to shelter their children from the “evils” of public education and, by extension, the real world. First, opponents of home schooling base this notion on ignorance of alternative philosophies of education. In reality, families with conservative views of education – often those with strong religious beliefs – do not, of course, see their choice to home school as incompatible with the needs of their children. Instead, they view home schooling as a solution to their increasing disillusionment with the public education system.

Indeed, conservative home schooling families argue that public schools deviate overwhelmingly from the core curricula that they perceive as fundamentally necessary for the development of good, moral, and educated children. Clearly, opponents of home schooling have seriously misinterpreted this argument.

A second implication of this notion lies in an oversimplification of the home schooling population: religion does not necessarily determine which families home school and which do not; for many home schooling families, religion does not even enter the equation. In fact, home schoolers generally divide themselves into two categories primarily based on their philosophical beliefs about education as an institution: ideologues comprise those families that wish to restrict the ever-increasing exposure to violence, sex, and behavioral problems their children might face in public schools.

On the other end of the spectrum, pedagogues comprise those families that wish to expand the opportunities their children might have in the nontraditional setting through experiential and authentic learning.

In short, home schooling remains an educational alternative for two distinct types of families; moreover, both types of home schooling families consciously place the interests of the child at the forefront of every educational decision. Unfortunately, the public school system often falls short of the standards such parents expect for their children’s education. Barring a nationwide upheaval of the entire educational construct, a viable alternative for many families manifests in home schooling.

Myth 3: Home-schooled children suffer socially. The first fallacy in this notion is the assumption that children in public school inherently benefit in the realm of socialization. However, proponents of home schooling argue that the typical school setting actually inhibits healthy development of social skills. For example, the educational institution segments students in public schools into groups based on age; this results in children primarily socializing with children of the same developmental level for the entirety of their education.

Also, home schoolers argue that the public school is often a breeding ground for crowds, cliques and the promotion of exclusionary and prejudicial judgments of others, resulting in even more homogenization of children. Lastly, public school constitutes not only a place of instruction, but also one of intense focus on routine, conformity, and obedience. While supporters of public school claim that such rigidity correctly represents the professional world and therefore properly prepares children for the workplace, home schooling families may question such compliance.

Furthermore, the second fallacy in the supposition that home schoolers suffer socially lies in misconceptions about a day in the life of a home schooled child. Contrary to popular belief, home schooling families often make a conscious, daily effort to forge meaningful, lasting, and diverse relationships with the people of the surrounding communities. Many of who may not even subscribe to the same home schooling philosophy; thus, extracurricular activities, sports, peer-groups, and volunteerism provides home schoolers with plenty of socialization.

In short, home schooling parents do not lock up their children with a book and a blackboard; in fact, some home schooling families actually associate such inflexible conditions with those in public school.

The myths of home schooling are clearly just that: unsubstantiated and ignorantly formed suppositions of an educational alternative. In order for parents to make sound decisions regarding the educational futures of their children, they must replace such myths with knowledge. Thankfully, as growing numbers of families choose home schooling over the traditional school setting, it appears that the misconceptions shrouding this ambitious and rewarding educational choice are beginning to diminish.

Once the aforementioned myths finally disappear, perhaps society will then see home schooling in its truest light.

Dusty Lavoie, a resident of Old Town, is senior secondary education major at the University in Maine, and is a father of home-schooled children.