John Taylor Gatto looks at alternatives to our present standard educational model.

When it comes to the books we read, the neighbourhood we live in, the religion or philosophy we practise, the food we eat, the people we associate with, in fact, in most areas of our lives, we highly value our freedom of choice. Yet, when it comes to one of our most precious resources--our children--parents are not permitted to exercise this necessary freedom. State interference with and control of education is greater than it is in almost any other area of personal choice.

Most education officials publicly claim that teachers need special “qualifications” in order to be effective. As a result, public education organizations often promote legislation or an interpretation of the law which would require home school parents to have one of three qualifications: 1) a teacher certificate, 2) a college degree, or 3) pass a “teacher’s exam.” Although this seems reasonable on the surface, such requirements not only violate the right of parents to teach their children as guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments, but virtually all academic research documents that there is no positive correlation between teacher qualifications (especially teacher certification requirements) and student performance.

The nasty scrap inside California's process for picking its public school textbooks shows why publishers and educrats must share some of the blame for poor test results.

Parents engaged in homeschooling often cite three primary concerns about public schools: the perceived absence of academic rigor, worries about maladjusted graduates, and the presence of an anti-religious atmosphere. Homeschool advocates contend that this educational approach successfully tackles these issues, arguing that homeschooled students perform exceptionally well, irrespective of one's educational philosophy. Proponents also maintain that private schools share similarities with public schools, albeit to a lesser extent, making them susceptible to similar criticisms. The arguments supporting homeschooling can be scrutinized through personal case histories and scholarly analysis, with this paper delving into the numerous studies conducted on various facets of homeschooling.

There is a national campaign to institutionalize all preschoolers through government funded and/or mandated "universal preschool." This group seeks to redefine universal preschool as an unheralded worldwide community of loving, functional parents who exercise their right and authority to nurture and teach their young children at home.

Parents should take their kids out of government school because government education is not possible. "Government education" is an oxymoron. The object of teaching is the transmission of truth, which is reality. A synonym for the word “teach” is “indoctrinate.” Another good term is to “propagate” or “propagandize,” which is the teaching of any system of principles. You can see the problem with any government indoctrinating or propagandizing children. It is inherently immoral and un-American to charge the government with this responsibility.

Isn't it amazing how many five year olds go off to school as bright, curious, trusting ("gifted and talented") kids, and in a year or two become dull, angry little aliens? Parents who expect the government schools to provide high quality academic education for smart children will always be frustrated. It's simply not offered. Those parents need to understand that the public schools are intended to offer only a minimum level of academic learning -- nothing more. In fact, the employees are not even academically oriented beyond the minimum level.

Much of the time, public school initiatives and regulations do not affect homeschoolers. The “next big thing” in public education, called Common Core education standards, already is, however, and that influence will grow. There are three major ways this nationwide initiative affects homeschool families: curriculum, testing, and student data tracking. There are some positive things about Common Core for public school students. For homeschool families, it largely represents an intrusion into their education freedoms.

More than 1.2 million students are now being taught at home, more students than are enrolled in the entire New York City public school system. Paul T. Hill reports on the pros and cons of learning at home—and the effects home schooling will have on public schools.

A veteran teacher talks about her experience as a substitute teacher. Full of anecdotes, this article illustrates the state of classrooms today. She concludes that if she had school aged children, she would not place them in public schools, but would choose to homeschool them.

Success in school--and in life--requires an active and independent mind. It would be nice if that came easily, but quite the opposite is true. And what's worse is that today, without realizing it, we are training and encouraging our children to become just the opposite--passive. As parents, we can teach our children social skills. This is not the job of our schools.

Children naturally love to learn. They want to know everything. "Daddy, why is the sky blue?" "Why can't I see my back?" "Why are those dogs doing that?" "Are we there yet?" And so on and so on. Then we send them to school. And all desire to learn is methodically destroyed. Many of today's citizens are products of the schools of the last twenty years, during which time the trend has been to adopt a more and more socialistic posture. Most teachers have never spent their lives anywhere except in classrooms, and their vision of the world is so much at odds with the real world of business and industry as to be virtually a different society.

Our educational systems today are based on government coercion. The fact that the student body is a captive audience frees educators from any urgent need to satisfy the wishes of their clientele. Pupils cannot "vote" with their feet; parents cannot "vote" with their tax dollars.