Critics of homeschooling often complain that it is too individualistic and harms public schools, which they consider a “common good.”

“We must not forget why public schools were funded in the first place: as social equalizers where communities can come together for the benefit of their children,” says Kathryn Jezer-Morton for the Cut, a division of new York and Vox Media.

“If enough people take their children out of public school, at some point the public schools will lose out. One of the moral consequences of the individualistic nature of this country is that no one has to take responsibility for their personal choices.”

However, this shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of homeschooling, even though Jezer-Morton argues that she has “nothing against homeschooling per se.”

Just ask Abilene Christian University professor Myles Werntz, who began homeschooling during the COVID-19 pandemic. Four years later, his family is still homeschooling their children.

“We can agree with the apostle Paul that it is good to live in peace with all people as far as we can (Rom. 12:18), and agree with Jeremiah that we should seek the welfare of the city (29:7),” he writes for Christianity today.

“But that does not mean that we can only pursue these goals with the means that the state makes available to us. It does not mean that people of good will cannot disagree about the form of the common good, but agree on its value.”

Werntz concludes with a thought-provoking question: “What if, as my family has discovered, it were possible to homeschool children for the greater good?”

“A little monomaniacal” or parental responsibility?

For all of Jezer-Morton’s emotional hand-wringing about homeschooling, she fails to realize that this alternative form of education actually brings with it only responsibility.

When parents choose to bear the entire burden and burden of their child’s education, it is in their best interest to make sure they do it well.

However, she considers homeschooling to be “slightly monomaniacal” because it means striving to be “the parent of your own child And Teacher.”

Has she forgotten that parents have always been their children’s first teachers?

Parents usually teach their children to crawl, talk, walk and go potty. We remember these parenting rituals with varying degrees of affection (or relief that they are over!), but there was nothing monomaniacal about them.

Does this change as the children get older?

Jezer-Morton believes this is true, describing teaching as “an elite skill.” She complains that homeschooling “assumes that anyone can teach and that all you need is energy and basic literacy skills.”

Indeed. All research to date has shown that homeschooling is extremely successful for all parents, regardless of their educational background (Thomas Edison’s mother is a famous example).

“Homeschool students perform above average on achievement tests, regardless of their parents’ education level or their family’s household income,” the National Home Education Research Institute (NHERI) explains on its website.

“Whether homeschooling parents have ever been trained teachers has no significant impact on their children’s academic performance.”

If we can provide all students with basic literacy skills, we will be well on our way to creating an educated population. Yet public schools fail to meet even this minimum requirement.

“Nationwide, 34 percent of children lack basic reading skills, or only partially proficient,” said Dr. David Hurford, executive director of READing at Pittsburg State University.

This has a significant impact on adulthood: “There are about 93 million adults who cannot read well enough to take their prescription medications.”

Even if we were to accept “good teaching” as an elite skill—which still doesn’t explain why public schools’ dismal scores on good teaching are so disastrous—homeschoolers can take outside courses, find certified teachers, and enhance their learning experiences with third-party support.

In other words, good teaching is not an exclusive monopoly found only in public schools.

“Children do not belong to the state”

Furthermore, Jezer-Morton argues that the homeschooling boom is “permeated” by the desire to “control what children see.”

Although we would like to think so, ultimately someone will control what our children see – either the parents or the government.

Which state in the United States has historically been recognized as controlling the education of its children?

The answer may surprise you: Parents.

Zan Tyler, one of the early homeschooling pioneers in South Carolina, cites this U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Pierce vs. Society of Sisters in 1925:

“The fundamental theory of liberty upon which all governments of this Union are founded, excludes any general power of the State to standardize its children by compelling them to accept instruction only from public teachers. The child is not a creature of the State alone. Those who educate him and direct his destiny have the right, combined with the high duty, of recognizing him and preparing him for additional responsibilities.”

Tyler, who reluctantly homeschools her own children, highlights the problem with Jezer-Morton’s unspoken assumption.

Contemporary culture has transferred primary responsibility for education from parents to the state, even though the state was never legally empowered to assume such a task.

“Nobody knows anymore that children do not belong to the state,” she explains in an interview for the Schoolhouse rocked Documentary. “When you have to explain to an audience that the child is not just a creature of the state, and that is new to them, we are in trouble as a culture.”

The true story behind “social capital”

Now that we understand why parents, not the government, have always been the primary educators of children in the United States, we can take a closer look at another of Jezer-Morton’s accusations: the erosion of American “social capital.”

Based on a recent documentation by political scientist Robert Putnam, Jezer-Morton defines social capital as “the idea that human relationships have value.”

“Putnam’s basic argument is that civil society functions better when people belong to clubs and groups of whatever kind,” she explains, pointing out that this leads to greater social trust and cohesion. “Putnam found that towards the end of the 20th century, club membership declined sharply, and with it many measures of social cohesion.”

Jezer-Morton criticizes home schooling as “a departure from the tiresome chaos of modern life and the frayed web of social capital that holds us all together.”

But instead of undermining America’s social capital, homeschooling builds it in ways that Jezer-Morton admits – perhaps without even realizing it.

Previous generations of homeschoolers formed clubs and groups focused on homeschooling freedom. Many of these still exist today and are thriving. The Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) is a great example.

In addition, more than 40 years of research confirms that homeschoolers are more civically engaged and participate in the community than their public school peers.

In 87% of studies reviewed by experts, homeschooling students perform “statistically significantly better” in social, emotional and psychological development than their peers, the institute concluded.

These include factors such as peer interaction, self-esteem and leadership skills – all things that public school supporters usually only associate with traditional classrooms.

“Homeschool students regularly participate in social and educational activities outside of their home and with people other than their nuclear family members,” the institute notes. “They are often involved in activities such as field trips, Boy Scouts, 4-H, political campaigns, church counseling, sports teams, and community volunteer work.”

Overall, residential school graduates are more likely to vote, attend public meetings, engage in community service and demonstrate greater political tolerance than public school graduates, the study found.

If homeschooling creates an environment where “no one has to take responsibility for their personal choices,” as Jezer-Morton claims, how is it that its graduates are such responsible citizens who care deeply about helping others?

Yes to the common good of homeschooling

By characterizing public schools as a common good, Jezer-Morton and others tend to view all alternatives as morally deficient. If you don’t financially support public schools by sending your children there, you are not supporting the common good.

However, Werntz points out the discrepancy with this way of thinking: “Money is not the only measure, and not everything that public schools offer as a common good is necessarily good.”

For these reasons, Werntz says, individuals’ decisions to homeschool may actually benefit the community as a whole more than public schools.

“Is it possible that by saying ‘no’ to the specific, flawed version of a public good, we are saying ‘yes’ to the common good it is intended to serve?” he asks.

Absolutely. Years of homeschooling experience have proven that people with an individualistic mindset have created their own “social equalizers” that benefit our nation’s children – by homeschooling them.

In fact, homeschooling may do even more to restore our nation’s “fraying web of social capital” than public schools ever could.