During the industrial age, when parents moved from farms to factories, it became more cost-effective to put kids in school than put them to work. So parents bought into the idea of state-run school. At that point, school became the most expensive babysitting operation on the planet.

In the pre-industrialized world, only the kids with a governess got an education. And those governess types were so quirky and fun because it was an alternative choice to be a governess instead of stay in the town you were born in, get married and have kids of your own. (Think of going airborne with Mary Poppins, or singing with the von Trapp kids and Maria.)

In today’s school system teachers choose teaching because it’s safe and predictable. You can generally get a job teaching where you were born, and (before Scott Walker busted unions) teachers could rely on a lifetime position.

The problem is that today’s workplace rewards risk takers. It rewards entrepreneurial thinking and people who are trained to think independently and creatively – information synthesizers. Why is it good to have people who took a safe route training people for an inherently unstable workforce?

The parents most willing to stay home and teach their kids all day long are probably the parents who do not fit in well in corporate America. That’s why they are willing to leave and stay with kids.

What if we had only the workplace geniuses running homeschooling? Would that be better? Are we aiming to train our kids so that they can successfully navigate the workplace that dominates adult life instead of leaving the workforce? What is the best type of person to teach children given the world they will need to navigate?

My friend Melissa was homeschooled. She loved horses so her parents gave her some schoolwork-type stuff and let the nanny take her to the barn and she hung out with the trainer all day helping take care of horses and doing some homework in between.

Melissa did very well in the horse world. She always had an expensive pony and she had a trainer, who was presumably charging the parents an arm and a leg for all-day horse homeschool.

I learned from Melissa’s experience that it’s really easy for rich, homeschooled kids to look very talented. Because Melissa came to our farm and bought horses and pretty much had no idea how to train a horse. She didn’t know that she didn’t know, because the trainer was with her all the time.

So I’m thinking, why not do that for my kids? I’m not sure there’s anything wrong with the false sense of accomplishment. If a kid works hard and loves what they are doing, who cares if there’s an unfair advantage of time and money because they are rich-kid homeschoolers? I don’t think it’s a coincidence that so many child prodigies are rich, homeschooled kids. I’m not sure which order things come in: the top-tier lessons, the all-day opportunities, the huge talent.

I think the purpose of schooling is to prepare kids for making good decisions about their adult lives, including what their work will be and what they should spend their time and attention on.

Childhood is 18 years. Adulthood is 60 more, at least. Preparing for adulthood is really really difficult, even if your parents would do anything for you, including homeschooling you. Because they can’t do everything. Adult life is difficult and lonely, moreso without lots of preparation.

The biggest reason that there’s a huge gap between the education of rich kids and poor kids is the summer. The first summer I lived on the farm, Time magazine published a cover article on the topic which I studied closely.

The second summer, it’s clear to me that kids in our town do not go beyond our town of 2000 people for enrichment. This is remarkable given what the rich kids are doing. The New York TImes just published an article about the breathtaking variety and quality of summer programs that rich kids attend.

The problem with not leaving your home town for the summer is that you never get an outside perspective. You never know where you stand compared to the rest of the world. This doesn’t matter if you never intend to exist in the rest of the world. But I want my kids to be able to choose from a wide range of lives that are not necessarily possible in Wisconsin. Which means I have to expose them to that outside world very early on.

The gap is not so much about achievement at the early satge. It’s about exposure to achievement. And this summer both my boys went to camp in another state. I didn’t realize it, but doing that is equally as subversive as homeschooling my kids. It’s a rejection of my town’s way of doing things.

This is a guest post by Lisa Nielsen. She is in charge of technology and teacher training for the New York City public schools, and she is the author of  the book Teaching Generation Text. None of the opinions in this post reflect the views, opinions, or endorsement of her employer. 

I’ve been a public school educator for more than a decade, but when parents ask for my advice, I sometimes suggest they leave school. (In fact I published a guide to help teens opt out of school.)

Education reform is happening today, but it’s slow. Parents need to do what is in the best interest of their children, right now.  For some this means working hard with a school to adapt to meet a child’s needs. (I outline a plan for this in Fix the School, Not the Child.)  But many schools are rigid and don’t believe students are entitled to a customized learning experience. It is at this point I suggest parents consider leaving school behind and empowering their children with the freedom to learn what they want in the way that is best for them.

Here are ten reasons why leaving school behind may be the best way for children to find success and happiness.

1. Learning is customized not standardized

  • In school learning in standardized to what someone else says is best.
  • At home learning is customized to what the child and parent feel is best.

2. Associate with those you enjoy rather than those who share your birth year

3. Freedom to learn with their tools

  • In school students are often banned from using they tools they love to learn with — such as a cell phone.
  • At home children can learn with the tools they choose.  For many children technology open doors that schools slam shut.

4. Socialize with those who share your passions not just your zip code

  • In school students have little opportunity to socialize and even when they do it is generally confined to those with whom they’ve been grouped with by year and geography.
  • At home children have the opportunity to socialize and make global connections with others of any age who share their talents, passions, and interests.

5. Do work you value

6. Don’t just read about doing stuff.  Do it!

  • In school students are forced to sit at desks all day reading and answering questions about stuff other people do.
  • At home children don’t need to spend their time reading and writing about what other people do.  They can go do stuff.

7. Travel when you want

  • In school they tell you when to go on vacation and families hop off to crowded destinations together.
  • At home families can decide when travelling works best for them and also get better rates.

8. You are more than a number

9. Real life measures are better than bubble tests

  • In school we measure students success with bubble tests and response to prompts.
  • At home we measure success by what children accomplish that matters to them.  Some teens like Leah Miller have developed their own personal success plan (see hers here).  She sets her goals and then assesses her success in meeting them.

10. Independence is valued over dependence

  • In school students are dependent on others to tell them what to do and when.  They spend their time as compliant workers and are discouraged from questioning authority.
  • At home children are encouraged to explore, discover, and develop their own passions and talents and given the freedom to work deeply in these areas. They know how to learn independently because they are interested, not because they are told to do something.

I am passionate about helping children learn innovatively.  Home education is a great option to consider for many parents.  For more ideas about learning innovatively you can visit The Innovative Educator blog.

While cleaning out my youngest son’s clothing drawers,  I found a shirt he got last year in kindergarten. On the front it says, “I love school.”

I put the shirt in the throw-out pile.

When I asked my son what he thinks about staying home with me instead of going to school, I expected him to say something like, “What would we do?” or “Could I play my DS all day?” but instead he said, “Miss first grade? I can’t miss first grade. Everyone is going to first grade. That’s why I had graduation!”

School indoctrinates kids that school is good. It’s like any organized religion. It’s just that the federal testing guidelines are god.

What if all the parents who are telling me to homeschool are actually more uninspired teachers than the uninspired schools they are supposedly rejecting? Bruno Bettleheim told millions of parents how to raise their kids all while he himself was a child abuser. There is no watchdog when it comes to homeschoolers. There is only the cacophany of parents dissing the schools for failing to reach goals the parents may or may not reach themselves.

Melissa took my six-year-old to Texas with her. She is there for good, but he’s there for a week. I was thinking this would be a good method of homeschooling—sending my kid to go visit other people, and see how they live.

After all, it is not lost on me that last time we went to a Chicago suburb for a cello camp, my six-year-old said, “Hey, look at that truck! That’s the dirtiest truck I’ve ever seen!”

And I said, “Yeah. It’s called a garbage truck.”

I need to make sure this stuff happens when he’s six and not sixteen.

Also, I was thinking that maybe I could arrange with another homeschooling parent to send their kid to our farm and we send our kids to their city house. Like, an homeschooling exchange program or something. So I was really curious to see how things would go on this trip.

It went great because he was exposed to things I could have never shown him myself. He stayed in a boy’s house who has a movie theatre inside. He drove in someone’s truck who has a playroom in the back. He ate at a restaurant with a Confederate flag out front, and asked if that’s the flag for Texas.

When Melissa proposed the idea, I thought the scariest thing was that he had to fly back home by himself.

But now that  I see what the trip has done for him, I think the scariest thing is that he might grow up and live in Texas.

When I go to the city, and I tell people we live in a very rural part of Wisconsin, on a farm. People say, “Oh, are you homeschooling?” It happens so often that I almost feel like homeschooling is a logical result of living on a farm.

When I’m deciding if I should homeschool, I don’t need to decide if homeschooling is the answer to this country’s education problems. I only need to decide if, given the school district we live in, could I do as good a job educating my children as the school district could?

I have spent a lot of time with strong performing high schoolers from our district. I do not want my kids to have the education these kids had.  It’s not the education I had. There are different values. For example, the high schoolers don’t read for fun. They don’t go to enrichment programs over the summer. These are things I assumed every high school kid did before I moved here. I was ignorant, I know. But it doesn’t change what I want for my kids.

The problem is that my choice becomes a referendum on the school district. And then all my neighbors take it personally. I’m scared to publish this. I don’t want to be alienated from our community. But I’m not sure I have a choice.