January-February 2008 Selected Content

The Fraser Study: Puffing Up Homeschooling and Selling Our Freedoms

"Wow," says your neighbor, "According to a guy on the radio, families spend $4,000 a year to homeschool. I didn't know you guys had THAT kind of money."

A mailing from your state legislator says, "I am introducing legislation to give school districts $4,000 per homeschooling family to provide them with a computer and technical support. To be sure students are learning and taxpayers' money is well spent, homeschoolers will be required to submit their work to public schools for grading and take state-mandated tests every year."

All three statements could have been based on a recent study of homeschooling in Canada and the US or on media stories about it. The study, "Home Schooling: From the Extreme to the Mainstream" 2nd edition, was published in October 2007 by The Fraser Institute in Vancouver. It cites Brian Ray's misleading, unreliable, and false report that by eighth grade, most homeschoolers score four years ahead of their peers on standardized tests as the basis for stating, "By grade 8, the average home schooled student performs four grade levels above the national average." (p. 14) An informal, unscientific 1995 "readers' survey" is used for the Fraser study's unfounded claim about homeschoolers' spending. The study also argues that the government should give school districts money for homeschoolers while disregarding the increases regulation that would accompany such funding. Inaccurate or ridiculous statements such as those included in the Fraser study are easy to misinterpret. It's just a short, quick step from these statements, which are bad enough in and of themselves, to misunderstandings of homeschooling like the three examples at the beginning of this column.

This column addresses major problems with the Fraser study, explains why we should not cite the study despite its positive statements about homeschooling, and suggests ways we can minimize the damage it does.

Problems with the Fraser Study

The study is based on unreliable sources. Some are research and studies that our previous columns have shown to be misleading, unreliable, and false. They include works by Brian Ray, Lawrence Rudner, (both funded by the Home School Legal Defense Association [HSLDA]), Patricia Lines, Mitchell Stevens, and Rob Reich.

Here are links to earlier columns we have written on this topic.

http://www.homeedmag.com/HEM/HEM145.97/145.97_clmn_tkch.html Survey and Lobbyists Cause Problems for Homeschoolers -- about the work of Brian Ray and the National Home Education Research Institute (NHERI).

http://www.homeedmag.com/HEM/164.99/ja_clmn_tch.html HSLDA Study: Embarrassing and Dangerous -- about the study by Lawrence Rudner.

http://www.homeedmag.com/HEM/185/sotch.html HSLDA's "History" Erodes the Foundations of Our Freedom

http://www.homeedmag.com/HEM/191/jftch.html The Kingdom That Never Was: Inaccuracies in a Sociological Study of Homeschooling -- about the Kingdom of Children: Culture and Controversy in the Homeschooling Movement by Mitchell Stevens

http://www.homeedmag.com/HEM/194/jatch.html Let's Stop Aiding and Abetting Academicians' Folly -- primarily about Rob Reich

http://www.homeedmag.com/HEM/206/ndtch.html Who Is Pat Lines and Why Is She Writing About Homeschooling?

Also unreliable are reports the study cites from the mainstream media. Generally, in-depth investigative studies such as this claims to be do not rely on such media reports.

In addition, the study cites sources that do not meet commonly accepted standards for research. One example is Homefires' "Readers' Survey: What It Costs to Homeschool." The editor of Homefires introduces the survey by saying:

This was an informal, voluntary, anonymous survey of homeschooling families in the San Francisco Bay Area conducted in June-July, 1995. The results were compiled by the editor of this publication - not a demographics firm. I believe the information to be a fairly accurate representation of the families who responded. Only about 16% of the families who were sent this survey actually completed and returned them. So temper the results with that knowledge...

This survey was not intended to be scientific. Information is not given as to sample size, sample selection, randomness of sample, and other criteria required for scientific surveys. A self-respecting social scientist would not use it for anything other than anecdotal evidence. Yet the Fraser study uses it as the source for their statement, "Even if one includes the cost of purchased instruction and field trips, households spend less than $4,000 a year to home school." (p. 18) Whether or not this claim is true, the point is that the Fraser study has no reliable basis for making it. The principle of "innocent until proven guilty" is very important, but it does not follow that studies like this should be considered "true until proven false."

Using unreliable studies and media reports, the Fraser study draws ridiculous conclusions. "Approximately five percent of home schooling in the US follows the unschooling approach." (p. 7) "In fact, 85 percent of home schoolers either belong to a home school association or plan to join one." (p. 17)

An institute such as Fraser is responsible for ensuring that the authors it publishes are credible and accurate, and the authors are responsible for making sure that their sources are reliable.

The study contains faulty logic and convoluted thinking. It cites different studies on the same subject without resolving discrepancies between them. Readers could either laugh or feel embarrassed for the authors if so much were not at stake for homeschooling.

For example, "Currently, 58 percent of home schooling families are 'fundamentalists,' though only 33 percent cited religion as a reason to opt for home schooling." (p. 8) On page 12 we read, "In Canada, almost a third of home schooling mothers do generate income...By contrast, a US report from 1997 found that 87.7 percent of home schooling mothers did not work outside the home." The phrase "By contrast" is misleading. Many mothers generate income by working at home, so the two statements do not demonstrate a difference between the two countries. (Remember that one or both statements may well be inaccurate.)

The study contains many misleading, unreliable, and false statements about homeschooling that need to be corrected because they are wrong, contribute to increasing misunderstanding of homeschooling, and can undermine our homeschooling freedoms. Here are some of the most important.

• "In 1980, home schooling was illegal in 30 states." (p. 7) Homeschooling is a basic right that comes from God or nature, not the government. No state has had a law that made homeschooling illegal. The study's claim may have come from an inaccurate "history" of homeschooling by Scott Somerville, who was working for HSLDA when he wrote it. (See our column on HSLDA's "history," Sept-Oct 2001.)

• The Fraser study claims, "In the United States, various estimates suggest homeschooling has grown at a rate of between 11 and 40 percent annually." (p. 9) Again, it cites misleading, unreliable, and false sources. In fact, reasonably reliable numbers come from states where either families or school districts are required to report to the state department of education. The larger of these states include AR, FL, IN, MD, MN, NC, PA, VA, WA, and WI. (States such as CA, NY, IL, and OH do not gather or report statewide homeschooling statistics.) The average rate of growth for states with statewide reporting was 3% per year during the past four to six years and only 2.5% in either 2005-06 or 2006-07. (Homeschooling grew in some states and declined in others.) The growth rates reported in these states were much higher in the 1980s and 1990s, but there is no reliable basis for claiming high growth rates today. Instead there is evidence such as that just cited that homeschooling is now growing much more slowly overall and actually decreasing in some states.

(Note: We the authors would oppose increased requirements for homeschoolers or districts to report statistics to state departments of education. We are simply using figures currently available as evidence of how wrong the Fraser study and others are.)

The widespread, exaggerated claims about the continued growth of homeschooling can raise serious problems for homeschoolers. They can lead school officials, legislators, and the general public to press for increased regulation.

Unfortunately, individuals within the homeschooling community are contributing to the highly exaggerated statistics. For many years, Brian Ray of the National Home Education Research Institute (which is funded by HSLDA) has been issuing false reports. Some of the most recent information on his website, dated July 10, 2006, claims: "Homeschooling may be the fastest-growing form of education in the United States (at 7% to 12% per year)." "There were an estimated 1.9 to 2.4 million children (in grades K to 12) home educated during 2005-2006 in the United States." These figures are clearly contradicted by the reliable figures cited above.

• The Fraser study's information about state regulation of homeschooling is just plain wrong. No state requires everything the study says is typically required in "high regulation states." Requirements for "moderate regulation states" and "low regulation states" are inaccurate.

• The study presents misinformation about the demographics of homeschoolers such as income, level of education, race, religious preference, etc. It cites inaccurate reports from Ray and others that portray homeschoolers as predominantly white fundamentalists, a long-standing misconception.

• According to the study, "Although parents home school their children for many reasons, the principal one is dissatisfaction with some aspect of public schooling." (p. 10) Notice how nicely this statement fits with the Fraser Institute's agenda. Some homeschoolers are dissatisfied with the public schools, but families homeschool for a wide variety of reasons.

• From a political perspective, perhaps the most dangerous part of the study is the recommendation that the government fund homeschooling. The study states:

Since 1996, a provincial program [in British Columbia] known as E-Bus has provided each school board with approximately $4,000 per interested home schooling family so that the school board may, in turn, provide each of these families with a computer, a CD-ROM, Internet access, a selection of software, and ongoing on-line assistance. In return, the students must demonstrate that they are performing at the level of their classroom peers and submit their work to an on-line instructor for grading. (p. 11)

Homeschoolers want to avoid such increased state regulation. In addition, one wonders how much of the $4,000 is spent on homeschoolers and how much is profit for the school district.

Using the study's positive statements about homeschoolers' academic achievements and socialization would raise problems.

First, it would be a big mistake to cite a document containing so many misleading, unreliable, and false statements, thereby drawing attention and giving credibility to a study that could make our communications about homeschooling more difficult and undermine our homeschooling freedoms.

Second, we would have to argue that the ends justify the means to cite in a positive way any document that we know very well cannot be trusted. It would handicap us rather than helping us and could lead others to question our integrity. Accepting positive statements from such writers and institutes undermines our good name and credibility. It would also give us a false sense of security and power, making us overly confident and self-assured and thereby, actually, weaken us.

Third, studies cited in the Fraser study use standardized tests to measure homeschoolers' academic achievements, which is troubling for several reasons:

• Homeschooling is much richer than the limited aspects of learning measured by standardized tests.

• Using standardized tests puts a different and very limited focus on what curriculum should be and what homeschoolers should be doing day by day and year by year. It erases the wonderful flexibility that homeschooling offers.

• To prepare for standardized tests, kids have to acquire a body of knowledge, attitudes, and skills that may not fit with our values, principles, and beliefs. This may encourage us to be subtly dishonest with our children and may require them to be dishonest in dealing with such an important combination of knowledge and belief.

In short, there are very strong reasons not to cite even the parts of the Fraser study that are positive about homeschooling.

What We Can Do

• We can inform other homeschoolers about the study's serious problems and strongly encourage them not to cite it.

• We can correct incorrect information when we encounter it, whether or not it can be traced to the Fraser study, by politely correcting comments people make in casual conversation, writing letters to the editor, etc.

• We can contact The Fraser Institute and ask that they stop distributing this study.

Conclusion

© 2008, Larry and Susan Kaseman