Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Educational philosophies and locus of control in homeschooling and schooling parents Wingert, Heather Dianne 1989

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1989_A8 W58.pdf [ 13.25MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0054418.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0054418-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0054418-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0054418-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0054418-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0054418-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0054418-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0054418-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0054418.ris

Full Text

EDUCATIONAL IN  P H I L O S O P H I E S AND  HOMESCHOOLINS  AND  LOCUS  SCHOOLING  OF  CONTROL-  PARENTS  by HEATHER DIANNE WINSERT B. A. Un :i. v e r s :i. t y o f B „ C» , 1964..  A  THESIS  SUBMITTED  THE  REQUIREMENTS MASTER  IN P A R T I A L  OF  FOR  FULFILLMENT  THE DEGREE  OF  ARTS  :i. n THE  F A C U L T Y OF GRADUATE  STUDIES  1  Educat i ona I Psycho I og y  We  accept  t h :i. s t h e s :i. s a s  c o n f o r m :i. n g  t o t he r e q u i r ed stanclar d  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF B R I T I S H  October,  H e a t h €f r  COLUMBIA  1.989  D i a n n e Win g e r t ,  1989..  OF  In  presenting this  degree at the  thesis  in  partial  fulfilment  of  the  requirements  University  of  British  Columbia,  I agree that the Library shall make it  freely available for reference and study. I further agree that copying  of  department  this thesis for scholarly or  by  his  or  her  purposes may be  representatives.  It  is  for  an  permission for extensive  granted by the understood  that  publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without permission.  Department of  hc(lf\oufir£ STOPi£S  The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada  DE-6 (2/88)  advanced  head of my copying  or  my written  i i ABSTRACT  Three  groups  children?  of  and  parents?  twenty  t e n who  public  had  school  chosen  parents?  their  children  t o t h e Mont e s s o r i. p r o g r a m  their  children  to the regular  control  measurements  parents  were  later  to  more  i n control  feel  controlled parents.  by  fall  into  liberal  groups. factor  on  moral  focusing  on  a  was  similar  development  chi a I l e n g i n g  and  parents?  Hontessori  homeschooIers?  that  IV  Factor of  homeschooIing  and  Factor  development  and  education  traditional  parents  were  were  controlled  liberal?  by  good  while  were  citizenship?  factor  II of  The  but  primarily only  only.  chance  than of  and  four  factors?  one and  factor one  fourth  slightly of  factor more  homeschooIers  traditional  parents  Interviews  suggested  well-informed  w£*l I i n f o r m e d  less  'Christian'  and  Montessori  found  subjects did  yielded  curriculum.  parents  were  Twelve  i n measures  that  of  schooling  moderate  i n fact?  III of Montessori  parents  than  indicated  comprised  traditional  beliefs.  'self-actualization'?  academic  I was  sent  locus  parents  differences  to the s e l f - a c t u a l i z a t i o n Factor  Factor  no  Q-sort? on  sent  had  three  educational  less  identifiable  conservative.  and  felt were  focusing  t e n who  completed  others  the Q-sort  The  and  had  their  c h i l d r e n ' s d e s t i n y and  powerful  There of  on  t e n who  HomeschooIing  their  parents  readily  focusing  Q-sort  of  and  Results  conservative one  chance  parents.  internality.  a  program  interviewed.  Montessori  traditional  not  and  t o homeschool  about  and  about  child  Factor  child  III  development.  INDEX  Abstract  ............................................ i i  Index  ,  i i i  L i s t o f Tab I e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ac know I e d g e m e n t s . Chapter  vi i  1s I n t r o d u e t i o n Purpose  v  .............................  1  of the Study...................... 7  Chapter  2s R e v i e w o f t h e L i t e r a t u r e . ..................... 8 O v e r v i ew.................................... 8 E d u c a t i a n a I Opt i oris . 9 Educational Phi Iosophies..................22 L o c u s o f C o n t r o l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 O t h e r I n f l u e n c e s on P a r e n t ' s Decisions....35 Sumrnar y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 8  Chapter  3s  M e t h o d o I o g y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Over v i e w 3 9 Problem and Research Q u e s t i o n s . . . . . . . . . . . 4 0 I n s t r u m e n t a t i o n . .......................... 43 Samp l i n g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 D a t a Ana I y s i s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60  Chapter  4s  Results: L o c u s o f C o n t r o l and Q-Sort....68 O v e r v i ew • 68 P i l o t S t u d y : C h i l d r e a r i n g LOC............ 68 M a i n S t u d y : LOC Measures., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 M a i n S t u d y : Q - M e t h o d o l o g y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 ANOVA o f B e l i e f S t a t e m e n t s . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 8 M a i n S t u d y : R e s u l t s o f I n t e r v i e w s . . . . . . . . 96  Chapter '  5s  Results:  Chapter  6s  D i s c u s s i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 O v e r v i ew................................ 127 L o c u s o f C o n t r o l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 Parent P h i l o s o p h i e s : Q-Sort and I n t e r v i ews. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 C o n e I u s i o n s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 Types of B e l i e f . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 5 0  D e s c r i p t i o n of Parent Belief C I u s t e r s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 O v e r v i e w . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 F a c t o r A r r a y I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 F a c t o r A r r a y 11......... 114 F a c t o r A r r a y 111 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118 F a c t o r A r r a y I V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122  R e v i e w o f t h e R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i c m s . . . . . . . . 153 L i m i t a t i o n s o f t h e S t u d y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f o r F u r t h e r R e s e a r c h . . . . 162 Summary.................................163 Bib  Iiography........................................163a  A p p e n d i x I•  Contact  Appendix  R e c r u i t i n g o f S u b j e c t s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170  lis  with  Parent  P i I o t . . . . . . . . . . 164  Appendi x I l l s  Contact  Appendix  Instruments, . 187 a) I n t e r v i e w S c h e d u l e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 8 7 b) C h i I d - r e a r i n q L... o c u s o f C o n t r o I : 18 i t e r n s ! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 c ) C h i I d--r e a r i n q L o c u s o f C o n t r o l s 12 i terns.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 0 0 d'.) R o t t e r I n t e r n a l - E x t e r n a l C o n t r o l  IVs  with  Subjects:  S u b j e c t s . . . . . . . . . . 179  S e a l e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 e> L e v e n s o n I P C S c a I e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 0 5 f: > Q-sor t S t a t e m e n t s . ................. 208 A p p e n d i x Vs  I n t e r v i e w s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212 F a c t o r A r r a y s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265  V  TABLES 3-1 s  Frequencies  of scores  f o r s t r u c t u r e d Q - s o r t .,«„.. 5 0  3- 2;  Mean n u m b e r a n d a g e s o f c h i l d r e n f o r t h e t h r e e g r o u p s o f p a r e n t s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59  4- 1 s  Hoyt e s t i m a t e o f r e l i a b i l i t y f o r l o c u s o f c o n t r o l measure i n p i Iot s t u d y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69  4-2s  CorreI a t i o n of C h i I d - r e a r i n g Locus o f C o n t r o l w i t h f o u r o t h e r LOC m e a s u r e s . . . . . . . . . . . . 70  4~3s  Analysis of Variance for t h e t h r e e groups  4-4:  R e s u l t s o f S t ud en t - N e u m a n - K e n I s M u l t i p l e C o n t r a s t s f o r LOC m e a s u r e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73  4-5:  Rotated Factor Matrix of Q-sort C o r r e l a t i o n s f o r A I I P a r e n t s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76  4-6:  S t a t e m e n t s o f b e l i e f r e c e i v i n g a score- more t h a n 1 s d . a b o v e t h e mean o n t h e Q - s o r t . . . . . . . . . . 7 7  4-7:  S t a t e m e n t s o f b e l i e f r e c e i v i n g a s c o r e more t h a n 1 s d b e Iow t h e mean o n t h e Q - s o r t . . . . . . . . . . 8 1  4-8:  A n a l y s i s o f V a r i a n c e o f s c o r e s given each phi Iosop h y < ' . 2 8 i t ems ) w i t h i n e a c h o f f i v e f a c t o r a r r a y s ( F a c t o r I, I I , III, IV, IVCa It.>>.85  4-9:  S t ud en t - N e u m a n - K e u I s M u I t i p I e Comp a r i s o n M e t h o d s D i f f e r e n c e s i n mean s c o r e s g i v e n e a c h p h i l o s o p h y (28 items) f o r each o f f i v e factor a r r a y s ( F a c t o r I, I I , I I I , I V , IV ( a I t . ) ) . . . . . . . 8 6  4-10:  A n a l y s i s o f V a r i a n c e o f t h e mean s c o r e s g i v e n each o f t h r e e p h i l o s o p h i e s by t h e f i v e factor a r r a y s ( F a c t o r I , I I , I I I , I V a n d IV ( a I t .!>>»... . 8 7  4 l i s  S t u d e n t - N e u m a n - K e u I s Mu I t i p I e C o n t r a s t s u D i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e mean s c o r e s o n e a c h p h i l o s o p h y between f i v e f a c t o r a r r a y s ( F a c t o r s I, I I , I I I , I V , a n d I V C a l t . ) ) . . „ „ . . . . . . . . . „ . . . . . 8 8  4--12 s  S t ud en t -Neuman - K e n I s Mu I t i p I e Comp a r i s o n m e t h o d b e t w e e n t h e mean r a n k i n g s f o r i t e m s f o r t h r e e p a r e n t d e c i s i o n g r o u p s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91  o f LOC m e a s u r e s o f p a r e n t s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72  v:i.  4~-i3s  Student-Neuman-KeuIs M u l t i p l e Comparison m e t h o d b e t w e e n t h e mean r a n k i n g s f o r i t e m s f o r t h e f o u r f a c t o r g r o u p s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93  V I  1  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I w o u l d l i k e t o a c k n o w l e d g e t h e h e l p o f my f a m i l y i n c o m p l e t i n g this thesis. My m o t h e r ? G r a c e M i t c h e l l ? t a u g h t me t o l o v e l e a r n i n g a n d my f a t h e r ? G o r d o n M i t c h e l l » t a u g h t me t h a t w i t h f a i t h i n y o u r s e l f a n d h a r d work y o u c o u l d a c c o m p l i s h a n y t h i n g y o u s e t your mind t o . I w o u l d a l s o l i k e t o t h a n k my c h i l d r e n ? M a r c ? A a r o n ? N i c k ? W i I l i a m ? K a r i a a n d J o s h who w e r e p a t i e n t a n d h e l p f u l w h i l e m o t h e r went t o s c h o o l „ I w o u l d e s p e c i a l l y l i k e t o t h a n k my h u s b a n d ? J o h n . It i s only w i t h h i s h e l p ? e n t h u s i a s m a n d e n c o u r a g e m e n t ? t h a t I was a b l e t o accomplish this.  i CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION On March 18? 1989? a front page r e p o r t i n The Vancouver Sun r e v e a l e d that  "More than h a l f of B.C. parents would send  c h i l d r e n t o independent  their  s c h o o l s i f they had the money* because  they r a t e t h e p u b l i c school system as doing o n l y a " f a i r " j o b " . Some of t h e comments from educators and school board members i n response t o t h e survey suggested the d i f f i c u l t i e s  that p a r e n t s d i d not understand  faced by the p u b l i c s c h o o l s i n i n t e g r a t i n g the  e d u c a t i o n a l l y and p h y s i c a l l y handicapped speaking?  or that they a s p i r e d t o send t h e i r c h i l d r e n t o "high  p r o f i l e e l i t i s t s c h o o l s " . (Vancouver While  and t h e non-English  Sun, March 18? 1989).  i t may be that some parents' concerns a r e t r i v i a l or  ephemeral? based on ignorance? certain  b e l i e f s about  to accomplish them —  i t may a l s o be that p a r e n t s hold  education — and about  what i t s g o a l s are? how best  t h e nature of t h e learner?  against which they compare the performanceIf t h e former misinformed?  i s t h e case?  of t h e school  system.  i f d i s a f f e c t e d p a r e n t s a r e merely  then p r o f e s s i o n a l  educators need o n l y i n c r e a s e t h e i r  e f f o r t s t o e x p l a i n t h e i r g o a l s and methods t o parents. I f however? p a r e n t s h o l d c o n t r a r y educational p h i l o s o p h i e s ? then a d i a l o g u e should ensue t o ensure that parents and educators a r e pursuing common g o a l s and that each understands  the b e l i e f s of  the other and t o promote mutual understanding and r e s p e c t .  The  phenomenon  educators.  Hirschman  combination conscious' of  customers  deterioration schools  will  parents" and  lose  Some  gaining  the loyalty i n harmony  achieve  harmony  justify  itself  either  meet  defended  as  a reflection  ideology beliefs for  that  " i f there education,  quality move  loyalty  to private  support,  and  The  while  In order system  providing educational desires of parents  1979).  t h e h a I I mark  i t serves. the school  schools  jeopardized  parents seem  these  conscious  CErickson,  conscious'  i s a  to  must  programs  or which  of a  which  c a n be  convincingly.  parents  who  have  of the educational  chosen  of people  specifically  various  i d e o l o g i e s they  may b e d e f i n e d  by a group  education,  t h e performance  and f i n a n c i a l l y  t h e community  and p u b l i c  of education held  smaller  that  o f t h e m a j o r i t y would  with  t o parents  high  'quality  i f i t does not  school  parents  an e n v i a b l e  the expressed  i s assumed  of public  to  a  The a l e r t ,  regarding  He p r o p o s e s  the 'quality  be o f i n t e r e s t  f i r m s need  the firm  of those  t o parents,  It  feedback  of these  often  schools,  to retain  should  customers.  abandon  children  ability  school  will  i n the quality  t o these  independent  provide  complaints.  (p.51).  devote  and i n e r t '  but they  to their  i n education  (1970) comments t h a t  of 'alert  the firm,  respond  of choice  options hold.  do s o "An  a s t h e s e t o f i d e a s and  about  t h e formal  s c h o o l i n g . . . and by  arrangements  imp I i c a t i o n . . . I e a r n i n g It  i s important  "The  available  translate  are  resistant can  (1985) s u g g e s t s can be  be  or  however,  studies  have  are  to  less  than  about  their  both  local,  such  British Gallup upon  Columbia surveys  specific  French  of  testing  of  in  national  opinion,  on  as  parental  likely  be  o p i n i o n of  belief few  education such  in the and  survey.  the  "Let's Talk  even  when  clusters'  internally  of  (1979)  serious  About  behaviour may  (p.369). been  welI He  reported  Most  of  these  little  or  no  their  general  problems. District and  #43  States — the  survey  drug  or  attempts  Schools"  beliefs  Surveys on  national,  or  local of  Sigal  outcomes."(p.352)  United  the  to  component  have  with  about  adequacy  Other  children"  'belief  behaviour.  discipline of  the  structure"  belie*fs  in the  case  because  beliefs  form  action  individual  as  parental  studies  asked  mainland  p.139).  beliefs  (of b e l i e f s ) an  ErIaut's survey  lower  to  behavioural  to  or  1980.  'overarching principles'.  parental  parental  students  such  to  Brown,  treating  which,  because  "relatively  belief  as  tend  by  i n the  that of  "Predictability  issues,  immersion  the  connected  focused  paid  ways  change- a n d  I believe,  that  parental  Parents  be  into  and  ideologies  indicate  Parents  intrusive  linking  attention  to  that  improved,  inherent  notes  p.16).  (Meighan  these  also  directly  1988.  inconsistent,  home"  identify  studies  rather  CStratton, which  to  at  —  the  such tend  as to  provision or  (1985)  focus  of  nation-wide  alcohol to  the  tap and  education public the  4 Sullivan for  Report  public  features  against  This  and  my  and  responses  system.  percentage  can  not  falls  under  be  of  the  i s any  specific  respondant's  to  who  educate  them  an  Montessori  ca)Iing  programs  the  focus  or  i s on  in  favour  reference  to  Eysenck's  for  of  at  Within  need  keep  home c a n do  those  alternative  of  of  the  or  i n the  in turn  discipline")  conservativism. or  being  habitual in  Immersion nor  from  parents  a  of  or  coherent  and  which  be  i s subsumed which  itself  Surveys  tend Whether  stricter  any  i s whether  1986  should  opinion.  favour  of  restaurant  ("Children  opinion  model  i n Meighan,  child  opinion  French  drawn  quoted  firm  considered,  alternate  than  noisy  specific  other  to  "That  between  are  with  as  habitual  example,  i s not  1957,  rubric  level  choose  education  schools.  , while  certain  general>  habitual  This  broader  beliefs  shared  Parents  to  connection  and,  opposition  to  (1988)  population  by  (  ("Children  the  issue,  are  opinion  heard").  at  discipline  In  the  clarified  leads  attitude  enquire  about  school  meal")  an  which  measure  Specific  under  there  for Learners"  s t r u c t u r e s (Eysenck,  ).  spoiled  Legacy  proposal.  problem  p.156.  to  the  any  attitude  seen  input,  of  question'  "A  other  the  set are  of set  beliefs in  philosophy.  their  be  expected  parents public could  children  who  to  also  be  have  send  schools,  out  of  different  their  parents  expected  school  children who hold  and beliefs to  choose beliefs  public the which  differ  from those of parents who,  alternative, reject Kerlinger  a f t e r c o n s i d e r i n g that  i t i n favour of the t r a d i t i o n a l  (1970, 1984)  has  program.  found two c o n s t e l l a t i o n s of b e l i e f  about education amongst educators, p r o g r e s s i v e and c o n s e r v a t i v e but  l i t t l e research has been done to d e s c r i b e the b e l i e f s of  parents.  If p a r e n t s d i f f e r  from one another  i n t h e i r responses t o such  i s s u e s as a r e f l e c t i o n of t h e i r adherance t o c e r t a i n b e l i e f s , i t would be wise t o d e f i n e the spectrum  of b e l i e f and whether  c e r t a i n types of a c t i o n s flow from these b e l i e f s . The parents i n d i s p a r a t e groups — traditional one  homeschoolers, Montessori  parents —  parents  and  have acted upon t h e i r b e l i e f s by  choosing  form of education and r e j e c t i n g o t h e r s . The question before  us now  i s t o d e f i n e t h e i r b e l i e f s , how  they came t o t h e i r  and t o what degree t h e r e i s o v e r l a p among the groups.  belief  Perhaps  t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n can help educators assess more p r e c i s e l y degree of d i s c o n t e n t w i t h i n the school system. parents are s i m i l a r why  Similarly,  i f distinct  parents remaining educational  If homeschooling  t o e i t h e r of the other groups,  these people have e l e c t e d t o educate t h e i r  the  one must ask  c h i l d r e n at home  groups are found to e x i s t amongst  those  i n the school system, one must r e c o g n i z e that  reforms which make s u p p o s i t i o n s about the nature of  the c h i l d and the best environment  for l e a r n i n g may  appeal  m i g h t i l y t o one group but may  appall  another. On the other hand,  aI I p u b l i c school parents may  hold c e r t a i n views i n common.  In  6 either  case,  parents to  an  should  educational education and  valuable  effectively  parents  system,  of  their  can  by  of  to  underlying  public  with  be  the  as  over  children.  the  influence efforts view,  type  the  having  the  differed  involvement important beliefs their  own  sense  of  establish  can of  differ  seem  their  children  to  be  is a  guide  from  of the of  a  from  one  from of  those  an  to  inquire or  alternate  parents  who  by  are  programs!)  in  toward  in their  wholly  whether  those system accept  who  for  their in  This one's  control.  It  control who  own is  whether  individuals  differ the  of  ascertain  lobby  by  confidence  sense  locus of  Thus i t  parent  children's education.  to  their  system.  motivated  locus of  by  Their  which,  in their  for  to  equally  or  the  lobbied  i s also  efficacy  the  for  (who  traditional  It  importance  another  school  system  difference  own  of  attempted  attitudes  c o n c e p t u a l i s e d as  considerable  parents  wanted,  they  their  i n one's  reasonable  establishment from  provision  whether  held  attempting  out  children's education.  varieties  there  confidence  would  trait  they  opted  elementary  in children's education.  ability  therefore,  the  examine  whether  empowerment  parents  in  their  substantially  to  to  or  of  educators  responsibility  Montessori  education  course  resulted  important  of  beliefs  parents.  seen  taking  school  eventual ly e s t a b l i s h e d Montessori  defining  is  be  communicate  Homeschoo!ing  understanding  these as i t  withdraw  the  in this  personality  e s t a b l i s h e d system.  7 Although  drawn  overstated, that  there  things  from  some h e e d  should  i s i n education  are perceived  debates  with  parents  largely  out  the British  of the traditional  Hirschman's  terms  understanding  may  these  have  beliefs  "  as  "alert  be g a i n e d shaped  form  of debate  schools.  Both  school within  when  Educationalist  parents  system  who  have  and t h o s e  i t c a n be seen,  consumers".  Some  by e x a m i n i n g  their  their  accusation  t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n s o f p u p i l s and  (p.398).  t o remain  perhaps  of Meighan's  with  with  public  and  incestuous  t o be wrong  ignored  chosen  be taken  " an  educationalist  consciously  experience  choice  opted  who  have  in  greater beliefs  and  how  i n education.  P u r p_ose _o f _ t h e _ S t udy_  The  purpose  of this  educational educate  setting  sense  children  program  for their  philosophies attempt  children,  which  o f power  non-traditional  over  who  who  who  prefer  by t h e s e  own  among  life,  setting.  chosen  and n a t u r e  Perhaps  aspects  to  a  the traditional  parents.  of  chosen  school  of the  I t wiI I  locus of control,  and t h e tendency  the understanding certain  have  have  a n d t h e number  be h e l d  one's  and c l a r i f y  pub I i c e d u c a t i o n .  those  relationships  school  can r e f i n e  education  may  the relationship  by p a r e n t s  a t home,  and t h o s e  to identify  choices  i s t o examine  philosophies held  their  Montessori  study  examining  of parent  the  t o choose  a  parental  attitudes  of parental  also  to  discontent  with  8  CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE  Overview  On one hand l i e s the actual c h o i c e made by the parent other, the educational  philosophy held by the parent.  the b e l i e f s of t h e parent personal over  and on the  and t h e i r  events unique t o the parent  their c h i l d ' s destiny.  final  choice  Between  l i e s the  and t h e i r sense of c o n t r o l  By examining each of these i s s u e s ,  the o p t i o n s , the p h i l o s o p h i e s , locus of c o n t r o l and the possible' i s s u e s w i t h i n t h e l i v e s of t h e f a m i l i e s that may a f f e c t  their  d e c i s i o n s , one can, perhaps, d e s c r i b e how parents make c h o i c e s i n education.  E»efore embarking on a d i s c u s s i o n of parental  c h o i c e i n education,  t h e r e f o r e , these several areas must be examined.  The educational  o p t i o n s which these parents have chosen must be d i s c u s s e d , d e s c r i p t i o n s of educational r a t i o n a l e behind  philosophy  must be examined, the  the use of the locus of c o n t r o l measure  e l a b o r a t e d and any other p o s s i b l e i n f l u e n c e s on parental motivations noted. #43,  A brief  look at t h e o p t i o n s w i t h i n D i s t r i c t  and a d e s c r i p t i o n of what t r a d i t i o n a l  schools d i f f e r ,  s c h o o l i n g i s and how  both by i n t e n t and by a c c i d e n t i s followed by a  d e s c r i p t i o n of the b a s i c views proported  by Maria  Montessori.  The two major viewpoints adopted by homeschoolers a r e d e s c r i b e d ,  9 as i s some of the research about the homeschooIers themselves. A f t e r o u t l i n i n g t h e educational  options,  d e s c r i b e the t h e o r i e s of education  i t i s important t o  from which one may e x t r a c t  common themes which may express the essence of parental educational  p h i l o s o p h i e s . The* concept of locus of c o n t r o l w i l l be  d i s c u s s e d and some s i m i l a r s t u d i e s using The  final  s e c t i o n c o n s i s t s of those other  d e c i s i o n s such as the parent's and  education,  the wider areas of parental  locus of c o n t r o l noted. i n f l u e n c e s on parental the needs of t h e c h i l d  beliefs.  Educat i o n a I 0 git. i^ons There a r e approximately  514,000  c h i l d r e n a t t e n d i n g school i n  B r i t i s h Columbia ( M i n i s t r y of Education, 1000-3000 f a m i l i e s educating 1988). school  1986) compared with t h e  t h e i r youngsters at home ( S u l l i v a n ,  T h i s great body of parents whose c h i l d r e n attend p u b l i c a r e not, as a Vancouver newspaper r e p o r t e d ,  s a t i s f i e d with the school  entirely  t h e i r c h i l d r e n attend but may be t i e d  t o them by bonds of n e c e s s i t y , i n e r t i a or lack of v i a b l e alternatives.  P r i v a t e s c h o o l s , attended  p o p u l a t i o n a r e f r e q u e n t l y denominational financial  burden t o the parents.  by &"/. of the school age and always an a d d i t i o n a l  Home s c h o o l i n g r e q u i r e s a  moderately knowledgable parent  who has t h e committment,  organisational  with her c h i l d r e n and time t o  skills,  rapport  imp Iemenent an e f f e c t i v e program (Wade, 1986).  Since i t i s  g e n e r a l l y t h e mother who teaches ( L i n e s , 1986), those who work o u t s i d e the home a r e by n e c e s s i t y precluded  from attempting t o  10 home s c h o o l .  Some s c h o o l French  These  systems  Immersion  International While  school  system  from  children  preschools  a degree  differs  i n the style  restrictions  who  than  Montessori extant  lack  this  by g i v i n g  preschools.  preschool.  and s e r v e s  functions spite  two o r t h r e e — d a y  does  Uniformity time  some  currently  operates  i n two  on  i n these into  to private  parents  who  of the  which  h a s been  elementary  t h e Montessori the public  program  system i n  attendance.  a h a I I mark  questioned  enrolment  by t h e f i v e - d a y  and t h e s t y l e  within  general  neighbourhood  as those  i s justified  these  entrance  as admittance  program,  h a s not been  Socrates  per year,  school  alternative  on  tuition  The p u b l i c  o f some r e s t r i c t i o n s  Where  preferential  as well  Thus,  either  the traditional  attract  program  192 c h i l d r e n .  as the true  schools.  intellectual  Since  $1,000 - $2,000  program  high  a r e sometime p l a c e d  the prerequisites  for ten years,  schools  from  as  or t h e  Immersion of  such  grades  of instruction.  t h e e x t r a $ 1 0 0 - $200 a month  rather  the  and French  families.  programs  i n the senior  h a s some o f t h e l i m i t a t i o n s  However,  children  system  c a n be between  program  schools.  program  Montessori  t o some  alternate  Program  t h e neighbourhood  from  closed  i n t h e elementary  as requiring  largely  function,  enrolment  feel  Baccalaureate  the M o n t e s s o r i  programs  the  or Montessori  or a r e seen  prowess,  a r e thus  i n B.C. p r o v i d e  the Baccalaureate  require  to  options  of educational  Athenian  youths  theory  and  i n t h e market,  from  11 debate of  as  to  education  ago  how  and  has  raged.  mankind  things best is  teach  and  Aristotle's  life.  as  to  the  assessment  ultimate  made 2 3 0 0  practice  principle*  should  the  higher  knowledge  trainings  alI  (Jowet t ?  1943.  alternate  popular  three  purpose years  own  of  the  education  Corsini?  1979)  Unite*d  led to  alternate  the  and  States?  schools  of  and  should  the  education with  moral  should  virtue*  the  of  be  have  no  proceed  aim been  public  there  had  been  idea  Earlier of  or  our  entertained.  the* G a r y  Plan  kindergarten  an  enacted  attempt  "schools specialty  school  to of  system  previous  in the  again  attempts  century  c o n t r a c t s and  Washbourne,  a l l been  the* r i s e *  or  the  schools.  from  had  or  or  whether  within  1960s?  Car I e t o n  goals  virtue  i s perplexing;  we  opinions  programs  utilized  Plan  life?  the  p.321)  experimental  their of  in  to  about  intelleetuaI  in  which  the  with  what  look  i s i t clear  existing  k n o w s on  we  useful  Winnetka  view  whether  Neither  The  means a g r e e d  the  creating  se*t  no  should  Although  Plan?  by  more c o n c e r n e d  one  became  are  taught?  virtue.  has  to  i s stiI I timely: For  In  what  the  units?  at  Dal t o n  the  which  permitted  which  encompassed  an  high  (Iqnas  through and  choice"  schools  school  eventually  address  the  to  total &  dismissed.  variety  ? magnet  using  children  models  of  needs  schools? such  as  the  'school  within  (Reywind, a11 empt  a  1985;  to  school', Fantini,  rneet  the  def use  d i s c o n t ent  system  (Reywind,  used  to  largely  certain  shared  age  catchment children dates  evaluation verbal  by  curriculum  0'NeiII goal  to  by  traditions  and  information who  expec t at i ons  a  United  States  been  differentiated Rutter,  1979),  however  all children  designated  school,  average year  of  written)  as  of  period  to  the  and  the  which  Amer i c a n  transmit  recall is  CIgnas  pub I i c  established  institutions,  transmitting  the  i s secondarily  socialized designed  to to  be  that  social  effective-  encourage  certain  a  number  whose of  a  specified  out  in  patterns  a  common 1979).  mai n  of  social  dominent  social  skills order  members  practical  birth  and  2< C o r s i n i ,  the  of  teachers  educ at i on's  of  in  have for  a  of  laid  appreciation  succeed  of  classes;  student's  all children  t hat  within  control  an  are  been  another  they  1986/87)  between  material  to  encouraging  to  t he  also  attendance  assignment  i s 24  within  teacher  needed  and  i mpr o v e  one  of  and  to  from  attendence  taught  an  pub I i c  have  compulsory  one  in  they  as  movement  or  e d u c a t or s  such  the a  by  o f t he  schools  desegregation.  features  "preserve  behaviour"  It  have  CI981) s u g g e s t s  i s to  citizens  racial  climate't  at  be  options  the  the  (spoken  the  some o f  In  fal I within of  as  1987).  ( i n B.C.  restriction  satellite  a11 empt  groups;  area  and  an  'school  generally  and  enrollment  in  schools  by  1973)  needs  or  facilitate  Traditional  open  and  and  creating  of  society.  problem  solving  13 skills to  in  individual  continue  to  verification  Attitudes varied. but  learn  on  of  such  Although  that  he  describing  the  (p.25)  and  encourages  parent  rather  Br i t i s h  by  than  of  attitude  (p.23)  proposes and  to  i t alI  enti11ed  indeed  "share upon  school  to  system.  Italian  (1985) and  West  involvement  rather  than  participation although  compared German was  evolving was  there  parent  permitted from  permitted was  also  a to  for  on  teachers  upset  parent"  A  with  1982  Education  Involvement  avenues  involve  parent  operate  the  seminar  and  the  i n E d uc a t i on a I  Concerns  to  educator  teachers  themselves. of  is  concilitory -  warning  Parental  explore  a  responsibility"  Minstry  Exp I o r i n g  attempted  i n the  Beattie  structure,  students  parents  "always  (of) the  f o r Lead er sh i p  'appropriate' for parents  Parent  and  to  helping role  helping  teachers  taking  a  toward  parent  teachers  Counc i I  crisis  enable  rationa I-scientific  toward  C o l umb i a  parent  on  to  (.1986) t a k e  Columbia  Nicholas  and  educators  British  involvement  that  and  the  Education  French,  based  DeBruyn  care"  "handling  Administration  were  own  advising  parents  dissembling,  sponsored  as  paternaIistic  relationships.  against  their  situations,  schools authorities  Some a u t h o r s  premise  group  procedures.  somewhat  the  and  for parental  i n c l u d e d what  themselves  movements.  in  He  authorities  some t e n d e n c y  to  British,  concluded during  democratization legitimatize  areas  in.  participation  by  in  the  times  process. existing  move t o w a r d  a  responsive to  reduce  model two  model.  parents  legitimacy  A  were  these avoid  voice  crises.  parameters  by  the  of  flowed  initial  the  matters what  educational  mode* I ? c o m m u n i c a t i o n  the  While  in educational  the  drawn  structures?  and  could  from  is  responsive enhanced  be  authorities.  only  aim  the  In  the  experts  to  parents.  somewhat  research  cynical  on  what  school  system.  school  ideology?  understands of  a  and  communication?  communicated  the  both  controversy  gave  way  In  the  at  'good  parents'  A i t ken? school  a  and  few  'good  parent'  i s one  interest  many  For  example?  who  in their  supposed  r o u t i n e s and  to  (1988)  of  of  the  what how  about  and  do  (.1986) r e p o r t i n the  child's  life  with  kind  of  education? plays  the rol  teaches  anyone  the  the  know  -  the  since  the  get?  involvement  in  system.  however?  i s doing  and  i t i s doing i t . ,  sample  in their  organisation?  and  of  that.  school  why  eyes  understands  parent'  d i s c u s s how  any  in the  'good  letting  'familiarity'  parents  informed  a  avoids  parents  more p a r t i c u l a r l y ?  its  and  Goode  parent  explanations  better  Meighan's  parent  carefully  aren't  very  although  a  by  t e a c h e r s ' i n t e r p r e t a t i o n scheme  Bastian  "What are  takes  home b u t  gives  'good'  parent'.  child  i s added  constitutes The  the  'good  note  they  appear  to  be  c h i l d r e n ' s schools? do  not  necessarily  the  derive and  By  clearer  experience"  becoming  believe and  a n d come  encourages  value  learning say will  attitudes  Thus  desirability  involved this  Working  --• b a c k  delineate  Alternatives  to the traditional  methodologically unique  vision  of children  having,  as  that:  teaching  few  parents  of  parent's  <1 p . 1 7 4 )  parents.  of the  will  they of  by t h e a c t o r s , systems  may  be  or they at  learners  I eaist  there  i s some  If parents  - the choice  system  they  providing  i n the school,  of value  what  of the v i r t u e s  i s a recognition  Immersion  different,  a  majority  the actions  as French  note  presuppositions  held  by  about  enfranchising  of the diversity  such  view  wisely  involvement  what  from  observe  Interestingly, i t also  the school.  there  to the beliefs  some  curricular,  while  actively  i n education,  the vast  toward  of parental  about  role?  systems  that,  They  diverse...Giving  and s t a n c e s  they  clarify  problems  and i d e o l o g i e s  not a f f e c t  i t appears  hesitation  systems  school.  school  a t home.  are very  parents  a more s y m p a t h e t i c  to correct  education  the things  the school,  of the neighbourhood  compensatory  more  from  )  with  t o have  parents  Parental  ( p . 54  familiar  follies  and  understanding  bring  to  educational  could and  are  begin  ideologies.  basically may  be  theoretically,  and t h e r o l e  to  a  16 of  the  The  teacher,  Montessori  Montessori,  such  as  method  an  i n the  children  d e s c r i b e d as  of  early  C h i l d r e n ' s House  Although childhood  through  1900s  mentally di  developed  children,  that  are  most  AMA  and  basic  several  other  methods  groupings respond  related  to  naturally  to  groups  striving  toward  means o f  self-correcting  in  he  which  task  until  period  she  satisfied.  the a  them.  "Activity  Teachers,  s i n c e her  i n t r o d u c e him has  work  to  the  hitherto  and  "The  1967 role  the  elementary  however, span  child,  i s free  who  to  have  the year  which i s seen  i s taught  chooses  the the  of  three  development  child  classic  by  the  area  at  that  remain  as  'three  words,  the  .  The  teacher  is  carefully  observe  the  ,p,106) i s to  and  more p r o g r e s s i v e  The  m a t e r i a l s as  been  the  maturity,  fewer  early  Montessori  and  utilizing  (Montessori,  'directress'  and  to  admonished  lesson"  child  materials.  with  creation  observation  1978)  The  her  children.  of  AMI,  p e r i o d s ' of  methods.  work  i n the*  classrooms  competence  wishes  lesson', are  perfect called  or  purist  her  preschool  careful  Maria  developed  encompassing  CHainstock,  teaching  of  for slum  on  Ideally,  who  later  Followers  the  w r i t i n g s of  result  i t i s her  'sensitive  different  a  program  popular.  similar.  as  based  factions,  splinter are  a  and  educator,  defective,  adolescence,  she  alternative.  work  Bambini)  developed  which  into  the  first,  programs  split  on  p h y s i c i a n and  (Casa  Montessori  Montessori  i s based  Italian  theories  the  he  special  comes  to  competence  more  need of  the  17 teacher,  but i n our system  i t i s left  mainly  to the  chiId"Cp.149).  Lest  this  technique  philosophy placed  much  The  sound  emphasis  child's  should  on  liberty  consist We  i n what  and  act  c a n be u s e f u l  t o which we  call  he belongs.  I t s form  good  breeding  offend  a child  others  But e v e r y t h i n g i n a n y way  should  and from  doing  or which i s else,  whatever,  a l s o be o b s e r v e d  every  may  be  by t h e  (p.50)  differs  of students,  of the teacher, i n t h e emphasis  from  the traditional  i n the rationale i n t h e de-emphasis  on s e l f - d i s c i p I i n e  (waiting t a b l e s , gardening and  Montessori  the  or hurt  or unbecoming.  creativity  that  educational  as i t s limit  may  impolite  t h e program  skills  have  t h e r e f o r e prevent  which  teacher,  be emphasized  should  expressed...(and)  role  should  anything  that  the laissez-faire  self-discipline.  o f t h e group  behaviour.  grouping  like  o f S u m m e r h i I I , i t must  interests  Thus  much  fantasy.  etc.)  for thie  program  grouping,  on v e r b a l and  i n the  explanations  'practical  over  i n the  life'  sel f--expression,  18 Home s c h o o l e r s d i f f e r  from s c h o o l e r s i n t h e i r r e j e c t i o n of the  i n s t i t u t i o n of s c h o o l , but i t appears t h a t they may a l s o d i f f e r widely  from each other, i n t h e i r c u r r i c u l a and t h e i r views of  education and t h e nature of the c h i l d . On one hand, we have one of t h e i r most eloquent  spokespersons,  the l a t e John Holt who  moved from c a l l s t o reform s c h o o l s t o d e s p a i r that they c o u l d be changed and a b e l i e f that education was " l e a r n i n g cut o f f from l i f e and done under t h e p r e s s u r e of b r i b e or t h r e a t , greed or fear."  (Holt, 1976)  !J!?I*_E'ybXic_Schc<CiX  Harold Bennett  (1972:),  the author  of No  openly d i r e c t s some of h i s s u g g e s t i o n s on how  t o c r e a t e a 'school  i n a s u i t c a s e ' t o those p e r i p e t a t i c  parents  who a r e on the move t o avoid the a u t h o r i t i e s , a posture which r e i n f o r c e s the image of homeschoolers as people on t h e f r i n g e s of respectable society.  At t h e other extreme a r e those parents who leave t h e school system because of t h e i r d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with what they s e c u l a r v a l u e s undermining t h e i r C h r i s t i a n b e l i e f s . i n d i v i d u a l s o f t e n do not r e j e c t with t h e e a r l y age of entrance  public  f€*el a r e  These  s c h o o l i n g but may d i s a g r e e  (Moore, 1979) and humanist v a l u e s .  They may, i n f a c t , r e c o g n i s e that f r e e and compulsory education has helped make America s t r o n g . Few who have v i s i t e d c o u n t r i e s where the p r i v i l e g e of s c h o o l i n g i s reserved for t h e b r i g h t and the r i c h would want to abandon the p u b l i c school (Wade, p. 15)  system.  T h i s i s s u r e l y a d i f f e r e n t view from that of f e l l o w homeschooler,  Holt, who,  in reference  t o educational  authorities,  asserts that:  They want everyone t o b e l i e v e that only what i s in school any  other,  i s worth anything.  But  t h i s idea, as much as  f r e e z e s the c l a s s s t r u c t u r e of s o c i e t y  locks the poor i n t o poverty.  Obviously,  learned  (Holt, 1381.  p.72)  adherants of these d i f f e r i n g views must d i f f e r  t h e i r approach to education  and  even though they share the  in  label  'home schooIer'.  Indeed, t h e r e i s much d i v e r s i t y i n the c u r r i c u l u m Lines  (1986) r e f e r s to two  they  teach.  s t u d i e s r e p o r t i n g that to what degree  home s c h o o l e r s used commercially a v a i l a b l e c u r r i c u l a or designed t h e i r own. t h e i r own d i d so.  In the b e t t e r educated sample of parents, curriculum,  while i n the  l e s s well-educated sample, 47/i  It seems l i k e l y t h e r e f o r e ,  widely i n what they are teaching philosophies  may  that homeschoolers would  and  be very p e r s o n a l .  that p a r e n t s should  that t h e i r  What they share i s a b e l i e f  Ware, 1987;  1986;  1987).  Using ten statements a r t i c u l a t i n g the common reasons for homeschooling, Mahen and  i n Ohio regarding  t h e i r motives.  VanGalen, 1987;  education.  (Lines,  given  vary  educational  be i n v o l v e d i n t h e i r c h i l d r e n ' s  Mahan and  727. designed  Preisnitz,  Ware (1987) surveyed parents By  far the most popular reasons  were  that  with  public  with  their  concerns rather  they  wished  school  practices  religious  and that  children's education.  about  than  children  t o teach  peer  school  pressure?  they  Also  considered  paramount  socialised  which  conflicted  d e s i r e d t o be i n v o l v e d  a d e s i r e t o have  schedules?  are better  beliefs  important  family  and a b e l i e f  by e x p o s u r e  were  life? that  t o a d u l t s than  to  peer s.  Although 1986;  a variety  Pitman?  Kilgore? al ? to  1 9 8 7 • Common  1987s  1984) have  home s c h o o l  has  been  differ  Galen  and  pedagogues.  Christians?  from it  and a  God.  American  Ideologues  parents  their  They  child.  They  that  object?  They  a r e well  chiIdrearing.  They  tend  and feel  n o t t o what  informed  child.  homeschool  into  ideologues  t o improve  their  fundamentalist  traditional  child  i sa  i s taught?  calling  b u t t o how  on e d u c a t i o n and  informal  educating  there  philosophy.  are generally  their  choose  who o b j e c t t o  and wish  teaching  to prefer  that  to their  who  c o n s e r v a t i v e and teach  feel  Pedagogues  measures?  homeschooIers  system  1985s  o n why p a r e n t s  i n educational  are those  Lines?  1986; W i l l i a m s e t  how p a r e n t s  i n t h e school  are socially  responsibility  or i n depth  schoolers  1987?;  1986; M c M i l l a n ?  1987; N e l s o n ?  to discover  i s taught.  independence  1988?  f e w (Ray. 1 9 8 6 ) o n o u t c o m e  divided  with  matter.  and M a c M i l l a n ?  brie-fly  effort  teachings  relationship  subject  focused  (1987)  (Van Galen?  a n d Ware?  traditional  Van  certain  Mahan  little  from  of studies  their  British  learning child  and v a l u e  i s part  homeschooIers  of  were  their  divided  into three categories  liei ghan, 1984) :  (Biacker,1981 as quoted i n  competitors, who  supported 'the  v i s i o n predominant i n s t a t e s c h o o l i n g ' better;  compensators, who  s c h o o l s but  they could  do i t  s i m i l a r l y supported the g o a l s of  state  whose c h i l d r e n had  difficulties;  and  run  but  authoritarian  felt  into unresolvable  r e b e l s , which were the smallest  adopted a l t e r n a t i v e I i f e s t y I e s and  group  an a n t i - a u t h o r i t a r i a n  It appears that parents of p u b l i c school  c h i l d r e n are  s a t i s f i e d with the performance of p u b l i c s c h o o l s . of Education's 1985 a Gallup  Results  education was  intellectual  each group f e l t in the preceding substantially regarding  i n d i c a t e d that  p u b l i c and  The  Ministry included  professional  both groups f e l t  development and  stance.  not  p u b l i c a t i o n Lets_X^L!i_About.„SchooJ_s  survey of both the general  educators.  who  that  the goal  more than h a l f of  that the q u a l i t y of p u b l i c education had f i v e years. The  p u b l i c , however,  administrator  performance.  declined  was  l e s s sanguine than were p r o f e s s i o n a l  teacher and  educators They were a l s o  l e s s i n c l i n e d t o g i v e t e a c h e r s more freedom t o set standards choose t h e i r own  methods of teaching  (Summary and  Highlights,  In a smaller  survey of one  the 246  p a r e n t s and  respondents f e l t schooIs.  and  evaluating  and  students  p.29).  district,  ErIaut  non-parents of D i s t r i c t  that  of  d i s c i p l i n e was  (1979) found that #43,  a biggest  of  17.4"/. of problem i n p u b l i c  Among the parents of elementary schooI c h i I d r e n ,  this  f i g u r e i n c r e a s e s t o 23°/.. "strictness"? felt  When asked p a r t i c u l a r l y about  o n l y .7"/. f e l t s c h o o l s were t o o s t r i c t  they were not s t r i c t  enough.  Of the remaining  48.3V.  while  half? 37.57.  wer e sat i s f i ed, while 13.4% had no op i n i on.  L i t t l e research has been done? however, t o determine parents, both the s a t i s f i e d and the d i s s a t i s f i e d ,  how these  differ  from  home s c h o o l e r s or from those parents whose c h i l d r e n attend a l t e r n a t e programs. they may d i f f e r philosophical  There are, i n f a c t , s e v e r a l areas i n which  from one another.  attitude,  experiences unique  These i n c l u d e general  locus of c o n t r o l , and personal  t o the parents or t o the p a r e n t - c h i l d dyad.  Educat i.onai. Phi I osophi es How c l o s e l y do those parents whose c h i l d r e n attend p u b l i c schoo resemble those parents who home school or those who send c h i l d r e n t o a Montessori  their  program i n t h e area of educational  philosophy?  B e l i e f s about the nature and purpose of education  should guide  behaviour.  A t t i t u d e s toward education can be d e s c r i b e d i n terms of two factors, traditional O'Neill  (1981),  and p r o g r e s s i v e ( K e r l i n g e r and Kaya, 1970)  f o l l o w i n g Myrdal  (1944),  a l s o suggests that t h e  basic American dichotomy i s I iber a I--conservative.  Myrdal  was  s p e c i f i c a l l y i n t e r e s t e d i n the t e n s i o n c r e a t e d by American propensity to i d e a l i s t i c  anarchy  based  on the freedom of the  individual  to  decide  fundamentalist, American between  Puritan liberty  relations.  provided  a  heritage and  and  a  which  Myrdal  did his  for  and  secular  believed  not  unjust rooted  led  in the  concern  a  area  the  Q'NeilI  educational  o r i e n t a t i o n . He  to  in  conflict race  with  American  proposes  variants, suggests  the  the  of  himself  of  with  psyche  three each  having  that  ares  educational Biblical days'  he  O'Neil1.  conservative  or  tradition  assessment  three  conservatives  i s just  equality especially  framework  a  law  dogmatic,  philosophies,  the  religious  1)  times  Although  educational  liberal  at  whether  fundamentalists,  Christianity  movements,  who  or  adherants  populist  are,  of  religious  ' bac k™to-~the-good~o I d~  in general,  ardently  nat i o n a I i s t i c.  2)  Educational  intellectuals,  governed  logic,  by  philosophical  3)  educational cultural social  an  believe  i n the  attainable spiritual  pursuit, or  ideal.  conservatives,  institutions  survival  religious  of  who  guise,  and  and  who  traditions  personal  proper  encourage  moral  to  respect attain  e f f e c t i v e n e s s and character.  for accomplish  in i t s  24 The  liberals are:  i>  educational  who  seek  t o improve  enhancing  each  child's  personal  includes  wide  variety  of individuals  Montessori  2)  liberals  educational role  t o Dewey  who  (rational)  change.  The s c h o o l s  to  and t o d i r e c t  think  development.  O'Neill  in this  camp  from  t o A.S. NeiI I .  Iiberationists  of objective  s o c i e t y by  have  allot  t o t h e school  but not neutral?  a committment  them  agent  t o teach  t o the best  the of  children  courses  of  social  ac t i o n .  3)  educational  O'Neill  systems  o f open  propose  t o remove  society  i n t h e manner  has a l s o  Likert-scaIe the  Iosophy.  The  liberal Illich  mild  subscribe  proposed  by  Illich  t h e moderate  liberals'  such  committment  deschool  and H o l t .  from  designed t o any  to  particular  a s Dewey  Montessori.  a  suggest  the deschoolers  r e f o r m i s t s such  as Maria  and  but  I d i o l o g i e s Inventory?  c o n s i s t s o f 104 q u e s t i o n s  ranges  liberal  enquiry?  restraints  an E d u c a t i o n a l  end o f t h e continuum  to the  rationistic  institutional  o f an i n d i v i d u a l s  through  'method  scientific  devised  which  intensity  phi  as  a n a r c h i s t s who  At t h e  such  to the  c o n s e r v a t i v e end  of the spectrum are arrayed a range of  from the mild c r i t i c i s m of the Council through the  'intellectual  conservativism'  the extreme c o n s e r v a t i v i s m Max r e a c t i o n and  for Basic  opinions  Education  of Mortimer Ad Ier to  R a f f e r t y and  other  a r e t u r n to the 'good o l d days'.  advocates of  O'Neill's  taxonomy, however, has d i f f i c u l t y d e s c r i b i n g the r e l a t i o n s h i p between ' r e a c t i o n a r y c o n s e r v a t i v i s m ' , conservativism' conservativism intellectual  and  'social  conservativism'.  conservativism,  conservative' t r a d i t i o n  the two  latter The  and  forms seem t o have  'intellectual  as e x a m p l i f i e d by The_Pai.di_ea,J^rorjosaj..  the subsequent s y l l a b u s , The_Pajldiea_Program  p l a c e s a c e n t r a l r o l e on intellectual life.  While s o c i a l  seems to have t i e s to both r e a c t i o n a r y  basic d i f f e r e n c e s from each other.  (.19821) and  'intellectual  l e a r n i n g and  knowledge and  (1984)  the value of  p u r s u i t s as a gateway t o the good, v i r t u o u s or happy  T h i s a t t i t u d e stands i n s t a r k c o n t r a s t to the what O ' N e i l l  d e s c r i b e s as the ' t a c i t a n t i - i n t e l I e c t u a l i s m ' of the  educational  fundamentalists.  O ' N e i l l , however, i s not alone i n proposing a c o n s e r v a t i v e dichotomy. K e r l i n g e r the t r a d i t i o n a l  liberal-  (1984) d i s c u s s e s h i s s t u d i e s on  vs. p r o g r e s s i v e v a l u e s i n education.  s t u d i e s took p l a c e i n the 1950s and  1960s and  the l a t e s i x t i e s that the deschooling  i t was  not  movement began t o  Although h i s s t u d i e s d i d not c o n s i s t e n t l y y i e l d alone, he  Kerlinger's  two  f e l t that the f a c t o r s y i e l d e d tended t o be  until flower.  factors  interpretabIe dichotomy most  or as v a r i e t i e s  useful  educational however? of  as representing  because  social  which?  a simple  movement  while  study?  philosophy  they  were  dichotomy. a Q-sort  w  a  E d wa  i-  d  * J.  theories while  school  amongst  'bird'  will  contain  also  determined  th€*re  individuals penguin?  seem  marking  of a  of a  popular  t h e movement  (1975?  will  have  'intelligent  may be?  the robin  like  examplars'  person'  'good  1978) work on  .  as  categories used  and  Thus  has  which  Rosch's  suggesting  that  particular  examplars'  of the prototype  such  Her r e a s e a r c h  (1979)  'intelligence'?  division  as ' r o b i n ' (a  as basic?  Neisser  this  category  examplar).  f r om  non-existent  1976?  c a t e g o r i e s such  are subordinate. to discuss  that  t o be  how b a s i c  (a poor  experts  of educat i on  however?  i s likely  prototypical  'poor  of  as part  currency  later?  Rosch's  subordinate  that  of concepts i s a  articulated  theor i es  elaborates  or 'penguin'  the layperson  theory  I t would  Eleanor  and c o n c e p t s  examplar)  s ep a r a t e s  for the theorist  laypersons.  good  to  ( 1982)  of schooling.  categories  rise  t o no school„  P o we r  fruitful  The  i n 1.96,0 a n d I M i c h ' s  ,  free  now e x i s t s .  t h e common  D§LS?.b.2SLi.tlQ.._Soci_et.Y- ( 1 9 7 1 ) t e n y e a r s from  remains?  e x i s t e d at t h e time  clearly  published  s  A question  t o t h e p u b l i c a t t i t u d e s toward  may h a v e  neither  K e r l i n g e r ' s work i s  to define the  dichotomy  offers  n o r were t h e y  Summer h I L L  movement.  a traditionaI/progress!ve  philosophies of respondants.  the deschooling  Kerlinger's  of this  he a l s o u s e d  as t o whether  education  either  or l i k e t h e as Neisser  reiterates defining term  features'.  such  ' fuzzy' there  and have  Neisser  would  also  categories  which  proposes  religious suggests latter  humanism, that  a t home  ignored  produced  its  B.F. S k i n n e r ,  progressivism  be q u i t e  to the  theories under  than  would  be  merits.  even  i f such  or  examples  turns  separate  from  one c a n be  Although  He  of the by t h e  conservatives  would  to those  of  safely  but t h e fourth  behaviourism  theorist  has  i n t h e person  to l i e i n the application of  i n i t s theoretical  t o be q u i t e  to create  and a n a l y t i c .  categories  and s o c i a l  seems  safe i n  rational  He t h e n  discussed,  other  Thus  i s welI-represented  have  a  expert.  to find  intellectual  he would  educational  rather  that  considerably i n  together  Power's humanists.  i t s own  likely  t o the layperson,  Pragmatism  i t s impact  seems  philosophies  O'Neill's  and two subsumed  a notable  one might  be h a r d - p r e s s e d  which  decisive  and t h e s p e c u l a t i o n o f  existentialism  Of t h e f o u r  on  overlap  pragmatism,  of schooling  lack  theories of  philosophies:  amongst  techniques  that  that  educational  while  be examined  i t seems  o f Rosch  an a b o m i n a t i o n  one would  o f Dewey  education.  of  four  would  'basic'  two i n e d u c a t i o n .  theories  must  were  be  may  or ' s c h o o l i n g '  t o assume  T h e work  suggest  life  f o r a l l but t h e s p e c i a l i s t .  of education  educational  conglomerations  Power  philosophy'  evidence  would  of daily  Therefore,  overlap  o f t h e layman.  like  feel  much  and t h o s e  collapsing  works  (p.181).  i s reasonable  mind  concepts  as 'educational  schooling the  'the category  similar  to  stance.  O'NeilI's  Neo-  28 Liberationists progressive  and a c c o r d i n g  theories  Essentia Iists, rational  Power  humanism  "amenable  p.189)  O'Neill  describes  Power  as  anarchy' as  He  Finally,  while  O'Neill's  Amongst strands. to  plethora  The  advocate  first that  the best  body  o f knowledge, This  way  knowledge,  t o be  which  by  rational  'educational of  of progressive  schooling  education  basically  and  religious  as p e r e n n i a l i s t s . philosophy  i n the vein  of  neo-progressives.  there  In i t s c r u d e s t educated  i s by e x p o s i n g  from,  to  of  philosophy'.  l a b e l s and c a t e g o r i e s ,  i s conservative.  gleaned  to the  the rational  and Power's  t o do t h i s  described  e s s e n t i a l ism as  as a separate  c h i l d r e n need  that  past.  sees  conservatives  of  'philosophy  i t sd i s m i s s a l  one b r a n c h  he d e s c r i b e s  Iiberationists  this  He  The  'educational  be  stream".  D i a m e t r i c a l l y opposed  and w i t h  would  or  i n d i v i d u a l s whom  i s that  i s tantamount  links  i s seen  essentia Iistic  conservatives.  a distinct  humanists/intellectual Reconstructionism  i n an  religious  the latter  as e s s e n t i a l i s t s  by O ' N e i l l  (1971)  to the older  century.  that  our a t t e n t i o n  humanism  Dewey's p r a g m a t i s m .  conservative  feet  humanism'.  forms  Pratte  their  deserves  described  of the  he c o n c e d e s  describes  romantic  owes a d e b t  a r e not synonomous w i t h  as secular  ' which  irrelevant  with  although  'romantic  humanism,  the turn  feels,  to putting  (Power,  schooling  from  t o Power  although  i s 'true'  t o be  them  not  i n some  run form  three i t seems  improved  to a  limited sense,  and  standard to, the will  make  the  children better  objective  sense.  citizens  This  group  conservative  movements as  stream,  known  whose  The  also  focus  second  sense,  thread  and,  to  be  molded  to  to  be  tended  i n order  essentially purpose also  as  i s the  'true'  aiding  includes  as  an  cover  the  beings the  not  espouse  that  they  or  any  the  child.  progress  and  i s not  progressives  particular  set  to  a  broad  of  c h i l d r e n as  c h i l d r e n as  Education  and  humanist  persuit.  In  bloom.  only  academic  regard  education  has  a  some d e g r e e  clay  flowers  The  academic.  and  conservatives  thread.  regard  might  an  essentialists  intellectual  i f conservatives liberals  in  rational/religious  intellectual  within  the  human  Iibera I/pragmatist  perfection,  from  seems t o  welI  t h e o r i s t s do  as  better  p e r e n n i a l i s t s or  i s education  these  knowledge  as  or  comes  social This  the  group neo-  p r o g r e s s i ves.  A  third  calls  strand  educational  attitudes as  a  It  can  must  from  with  medium  school one  i s the  of  be  that  separated  anarchist.  the  be  a  humanist  Although  a  sets  groups  them  unlike  conservative  remembered of  the  in  Canada  that  United as  the  i n the  their  shares  rejection  This  some of  rejection  school of because  schooling.  history  Church  United  O'Neill  Iiberal/pragmatists  reject  Canada's  which  group  apart.  and  States.  strand  this  Iiberal/pragmatists,  education  makes them also  romantic  and  States  i s quite state and  are  different not  parallel  systems  for  different  traditional, separate Wilson,  linguistic even  schools 1981)  groups,  t o the extent  that  I t may b e t h a t  when e x t r a p o l a t i n g f r o m  Parents  who  reasonably which  share  a common  be presumed  Canadian  would  differ  American  from  beliefs  fall  caution  of parents  a l w a y s be-  experience.  could  educational adhering  Donald  along the  of education  common  <!J.  must  t o Canadian  philosophy  those  p r o v i des  denominations.  however,  t o embrace  and C a t h o l i c a r e  Newfoundland  for various Protestant  Ii b e r a l - c o n s e r v a t i v e continuum: used  for Protestant  solutions  to alternate  v i ews o n e d uc a t i o n .  L o £ y s _ _ o J _ C o n t r cd_  A  second  Locus  area  of control  individual fate  or under  attaining control  seeking  the  the control  are said  mastery  i s differences attempt  a r e under  and i n f l u e n c e from  how  over  efficacy  tPhares,  individuals  their  others 1976).  could  environment  of their  others. efforts  environments,  controlled  at coping  a n d a r e more  seek  active i n to  power o r  an a c c o m p a n y i n g  CPhares,  with or  susceptible  "Iti s difficult  without  by  Internal  are less  consistently  own b e h a v i o u r "  control.  whether t h e  h i scontrol,  o f powerful  their  i n locus of  t o assess  t o make g r e a t e r  over  information  understand control  measures  b e l i e v e s events  individuals  to  of interest  p.176)  belief in  %J I.1. *3  Phares  reports  achievement social Locus  on a p l e t h o r a  i n children?  action?  locus  of control  (Wall stem 1981)?  of studies  family  and Wall son?  been  1981)?  and B l a c k b u r n ?  in prison used  1984)?  academic  locus  inmates  t o examine  alcoholism  d i f f e r e n c e s i n Japanese  Rothbaum  antecedents?  of control  has a l s o  covering  of control among  health  (Worrell  and  and American  cultures  and t e a c h i n g  behaviours  and  others.  practices Tumilty? (Weisz? (Kremer?  1985).  The  original  Locus  of Control  unscored. scores? there  locus  High  scores  been  unidimensional confirmatory be  view  1987;  Anderson?  and  Lee  the  Very  The  Rotter  of control.  criticisms  (1987) Simple  Structure  scale  from  the scale  are  low  i t sinception  of control  that  s i x items  of control?  and R i c h a r d s  i s n o t an  (1987)? although  using, there  may  i s mu I t i — d i m e n s i o n a I .  (Waters?  B a i l e y and Wesley?  contradict suggesting  Interna I-Externa I  of which  locus  Almost  concluded  by o t h e r s  Madonna?  Scale?  scale  locus  Marsh  analysis?  i s confirmed  Achievement  that  I--E c o n s t r u c t ?  Their  item  the Rotter  indicate external  locus  factor  scale?  i s a 29  construct.  an over a I I  factor  Scale?  internal  have  of control  Popovich?  MartelI?  1987) while-  a one-factor  Mclnish  solution  using  index.  i n conjunction  with  t h e IAR  Responsibility Questionnaire)? and t h e Levenson  Internal?  (Intellectual  t h e Reid-Ware  Chance  and  three  Powerful  Others  subscales  the  newer  The  Levenson  are  not  an  "may  assessment  ICP  concept. others'  the  s c a l e s do  three  other  external on  a  devices"  n e c e s s a r i l y mutually  unified  the  Thus,  and  not  of  the  psychiatric  patients,  Japanese. .51--. 64  for  .73.-.79  wit h  the  c h a nc e  of  who  low  High  internal  the  for  on  imply  and  any  her  others  high  scale  undergrads, sufferers,  'powerful  -.41  by of  a  Americans  of  not  any  and  consistencies ranging  -.15  Powerful  on  using  pain  Corre-I a t i o n s  between  is  control  scores  score  Hispanic  .72-.82  scale.  high  studies  chronic  into  scores  students,  and  of  externality  externality  internal  grade  white  and  i s divided  reports  9th  many  the with  scale  from  others' Rotter the  and  and  I-E  Internal  .43  to  .56  subsc a l e .  social  others  individuals  that  with  a  scale,  be  activists  some c o n d i t i o n s  Powerful  their  .25  the  'chance'.  (1981)  reports  the- c h a n c e  to  does  black  to  by  for  1.981. p . 5 ) .  internality  prisoners,  internal  reported  .22  Studies under  for  are  scale,  the  that  externality  nor  elderly,  Levenson  prototypes  e x c l u s i v e and  groups:  alcoholics,  the  necessarily prohibit  Levenson  variety  as  (Lefcourt,  control  subscales  score.  wide  scale  viewed  s c a l e assumes  "powerful  of  be  activists  subscale. are  which  members  This of  a s p i r a t i o n s thwarted. a n t i - p o I I u t i on  measures  Of  used  may  the  score  would  seem  minority a  were  group  IPC  s c a l e suggest  more  appropriate  groups of  highly  or  who  individuals  important,  those-  who  on  that  the  for  those  have* who were  had felt  actively likely were in  involved  to  have  concerned  internality  'powerful the  were  scores  but  had  or  are  other'  that  activists,  no  feel  the  by  There  in a  be  a  internal  like  played  a  When  study  where  polluting  non-activists,  outcome.  One  anti-poI  Iution  less  who  difference  others.  large  more  those  no  similar  than  potential  than  was  powerful  as  to  activists,  chance  in  differences  in parenting  demonstrated in their their  actual  relating  to  with  Graves  locus of  by  of  behaviour  and  to  being  from  important  but  might  role  in  parent's  situation.  Reywind  measure  in a  of  empowerment would affect  of  suggest their  parents that  .  those  child's  In  used  choice  general,  parents  behaviour  who  and  'ideal  internal  and  remind  schools on  the  sensitive control  part  to as  of  the a  resultant  locus of  control  b e l i e v e d they  the  of  literature  and  the  parent'  the  locus of  and  differed  locus  behaviour  child  (1986)  control  an  some o f  efficacious the  of  with  parenting  of  Pease  locus of  report  (1987)  school  G e l e j s and  parents  and  encourage  implicated in  behaviour  (1986)  control  been  external  the  supportive  study  have  behaviours.  parents  opportunity  parents  control  description  Swick  their  locus of  that  control.  of  more  about  Differences  and  actions.  perceived  were  subscale  were  Iives.  their  both  no  'chance'  i n v o l v e d , such  educational  might  the  p r o t e c t i o n groups  in control  was  optimistic  on  taken  belief  activists  more  surmise  low  others'  'powerful  company,  i n environmental  outcome  of  theory  were his  able  to  education  would  be  more  people  with  regard  their  likely  an  to  external  take  action  locus  of  children's  ultimate  i t s inherent  logic,  to  exert  control  an  would  academic  effect be  whereas  likely  destiny  as  to  beyond  their  control.  In  s p i t e of  that  should  <1S87> five  locus  across  of  the  the  (1983).  High  related  to  measures  Despite  these*  as  control  the  in  view  cautions  that  assumed  of  "global  He  of  National  questioned  of  Both  research  The  to  comes  from  he  EJtudy  concluded  strongly  validity  and  to  ask  between those and  control.  follow  afford  validity  Longitudinal  the  Rotter  of  and  of  the*  them.  control  locus  'fate'  were  reasonable  the  of  students,  s e I f--esteem  Waters  validity  or  criticism  construct  and  convergent  8,271  schooling  of  Goodman  'chance'  underlying  measures  criteria.  of  i t seems  program.  the  or  locus  s u i t a b l e measures  the  is a  convergent  serious  sample  theory  weaknesses,  school  in  the  of  the only  from  1972  a l t e r n a t e methods  however,  to  data  control  adequate  more  attainment.  and  of  that  of  differences  traditional seen  A  of  caution.  study  scales  Using  locus  goal  with  c o n t r o l ' had  School  used  are  choose  control  instruments.  neither  their  in their  'political  Richards  that  interpreted  concluded  perhaps  of  be  locus  only  more s p e c i f i c  parents accept  the  IPC  seems  Lefcourt  a  who  who  It  weak  whether  can  the be  wise,  (1981)  p r e d i c t i v e power  measure,  the  35 greater  will  criteria"  In  their  with  chiId's  the  power  this  assessing  themselves with  the  of  that  measure  in predicting  relevant  (p.386)  keeping  scale,  be  parent's  behaviour,  as  IPC  advice,  educators and  brief  belief  12  item  in their  h i s success was  Rotter  a  devised  Internal  in to  locus  of  control  efficacy  to  affect  life be  and  used  External  i n school  and  in  in association  Locus  of  Control  Scale.  Qib^I„lGiik^O£SS_on__Par ent^s_Dec is i ons  A  final  area  studies which  of  interest,  i n the  literature  are  unique  decision.  These  schooling,  to  intellectual traditional  Private fill in  to  their  have  British  Columbia  firm  child's  educational  schools  themselves  these  were  repositories  of  schools  upon  be  needs,  the  have  or  to  related  personal  influenced  relate  to  the  other  encouraged  relied  Eiarman  b e l i e v e r s i n the  Although  may  closely  them  to  experiences their  parent's  personal to  those  pursue  or a  non-  setting.  long  the  more  f a m i l y which  i n f l u e n c e s which  rosters.  are  the  one  focuses  experiences  their  who  and  (1984)  created  product system are  academic  on  of  now  merit  children  describes  to  of  the  serve  how  "the  of  private  Old  private schools  private education presenting and  high  ' o l d boys'  "  home  type and  (p.55)  themselves  standards,  schools  Country at  to  as  rather  than  as  purely a r i s t o c r a t i c  institutions,  i n a 1971 survey of Shaughnessy  r e s i d e n t s , SOX of whom had been educated i n p r i v a t e schools, per  cent  being  (of respondants) a l s o s a i d that at l e a s t one c h i l d was  or had been educated p r i v a t e l y and i n most c a s e s , . . . a l l  c h i l d r e n had some p r i v a t e s c h o o l i n g . " ( p .  John Holt  164!)  i n Teach ...Your. _Qwn defends h i s t h e o r i e s i n part with  iI l u s t r a t i o n s from h i s p u b l i c school peer b r u t a l i t y and h i s p r i v a t e school "it  "87  days, where he learned days.  about  In both, he claims  was a r a r e day indeed i n my s c h o o l i n g when I got f i f t e e n  minutes of teaching,  that  i s , of concerned and thoughtful  adult  t a l k about something I found i n t e r e s t i n g , p u z z l i n g or important." (p.59)  Van Galen (1988), d e s c r i b i n g how p a r e n t s become home  schoolers,  notes that some have had " p r i o r p o s i t i v e experience  with l e a r n i n g at homes  One mother had done her highschool  could  work at home through a correspondence program, and her own mother had  been taught at home by her grandmother."(p.92)  S i m i l a r l y , the perceived motivation  needs of the c h i l d a l s o  t o p a r e n t s t o provide  provide  alternate schooling.  lie Iii I I an  (1985) recommends homeschooling for g i f t e d c h i l d r e n , Colfax (1988) t r a c e s the beginning of h i s f a m i l y ' s s u c c e s s f u l homeschooling venture, which e v e n t u a l l y  led h i s sons t o Harvard,  to their  e l d e s t son's unhappiness i n h i s f i r s t  school.  The Moore's recommendation that c h i l d r e n not begin  school  until  year of p u b l i c  they a r e between eight and twelve years of age i s  also  taken  'becoming having  t o heart  home s c h o o l e r s ' ?  These  alternatives  Nault  chiIdren"C1988?  (1982)  selection"  "parents  and  did similar  (1979)  (Coquitlam)? French or  regular  researched  school passive  the  who  and  further  wide  (1985)  nature  assigned  they  that  cursor y  narrow local  the options  d i d not vary  much  increased  d i s c u s s e s how  who  and t h e role*  simply  active  that  chose schools  accepted  choosers? a n d wide*  both  the  who active  in their  I oca  the* p r o p o r t i o n o f  socio-economic.status?  i n number  parents  who  She d e s c r i b e d  school;  with  school."  i n the public  available  found  children  #43  of parents  system.  parents  question;  She  their  in District  school  their  sent  t o a neighbourhood  non-Immersion  afield.  of the c h i l d  sought  features of  m o r e* c c rn m o n  attributes  Passive  within  choosers  trouble* f o r s e v e r a l  i n examining  t o which  private  researched  choosers  active  Gooclnow  programs  children  a f f o r d e d a choice* became more  various  without  their  that i n  p.93)  family choice  of parents!  writes  but u n s u c c e s s f u l l y  c h o i. c e w a s  or r e g u l a r  for the local  program  choosers  parents  comparing  types  found  the school  researched  Immersion  opted  three  but  about  found  and emotional  for their  "reflective  Cogan  parents  had p e r s i s t e n t l y  and U c h i t e l l e  knowledgable  Van G a l e n  parents  sch o o I c h oice?  than  some  "considerable- academic  years.  As  b y some p a r e n t s .  develop  with  increasing  and change  o f the* p a r e n t .  SES  i d e a s on  She* p o i n t s  out  that  naive  education "Modern" are  society  seen  insists  paths  'refrigerator  mothers'  theory  expected  to "learn  and  make c h o i c e s " ( p . wel I a s p a r e n t a l (Schafer  252)  t o which  longer  terms  used  and t h a t such  and mothers  — create  Chi I d — r e a r i n g  them  there  as a r e no mothers  i f need  and e d u c a t i o n a l  are alI correlated  and E d g e r t o n ,  belongs.  children's deviancies,  options  modernity  t h e parent  i s open  Although  for their about  i s related to the  the future  a r e no  as culpable  education.  that  t o a n y goal,.  are  as  development  and t h e age o f t h e c o h o r t  multiple  longer  child  be —  beliefs  to parental  1985)  Summary  The  literature  phenomenon  guided  demographic experiences, child,  indicates that  parental  by p a r e n t a l  features  combine  parenting  choice  education, with  i n education  SES, and age. These  the parent's  experience's,  modernity,  own  educational  expressed  i n action  and  in the ability  faith  philosophy. may  depend  Whether  this  on t h e p a r e n t ' s  to control  one's  own  educational  the nature  and t h e ' a v a i l a b l e ' i d e o l o g i e s t o produce,  parent's  i s a  of the  i n concert,  philosophy locus life.  th  i s  of control  39  CHAPTER I I I METHODOLOGY  Qyeryiew A d i s c u s s i o n of t h e problem and r e s e a r c h followed by a general approached.  questions  w i l l be  d i s c u s s i o n of how the problem was  The i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n  c o n s i s t s of t h r e e  control  measures, a O-sort  control  measures were drawn from t h e l i t e r a t u r e and a r e d e s c r i b e d  briefly. piloting  and an i n t e r v i e w .  locus of  The t h i r d was designed i s discussed  fully.  items used i n the Q-sort  Two of the locus of  for the study and i t s design and  The c r e a t i o n and p i l o t i n g of the  i s also discussed  with a b r i e f  d i s c u s s i o n of t h e i n t e r v i e w .  Four s e t s of s u b j e c t s were drawn.  One set was s e l e c t e d for t h e  development of the new locus of c o n t r o l measures. groups of s u b j e c t s were used i n t h e design  Two separate  of the Q-sort. The  s e l e c t i o n of the f i n a l group of s u b j e c t s , those a c t u a l l y used for the main body of the study w i l l be d e s c r i b e d t h i s group, a subset  The  From  was s e l e c t e d t o be i n t e r v i e w e d .  r e s u l t i n g data i n c l u d e d that  measures, the Q-sort,  in detail.  from t h e locus of c o n t r o l  and the i n t e r v i e w s .  The data  analysis  s e c t i o n w i l l d i s c u s s how t h e a n a l y s i s of each s e t of data was conducted.  40  Although  there  is a  "little  i s known  parents  who  growing  about  choose  to  the  (1987) c o m p a r i s o n  school  superintendents  be  alone  It  i s suggested  homeschooling disaffected similar It  i s however,  child  as  a  parent  different  who  are  known,  the  (Van  other  the  of  Mahen  homeschooIers  that  there  is a  that to  of  unless  the  vast  majority  least  offer  a  of  knows  substantial  at  groups.  flight  one  seems  of  significance  the  and  and  homeschooling  the  example  of  appear  1988).  attitudes  understand  those  that  motives  educationally defined  to  and  Galen, of  homeschooling,  and  b e n e f i t s of  compare  i t i s an  parents  chooses  educational  1986,  p.173).  the  The  to  appropriate  parent  his child's  success  outcome  i s under  the  presumably  i s  must  -  the  parent's  shares less  a  to  by  of the  how  of  parents.  undercurrent  some p a r e n t s different  definition  that  of  location  also  education  eventual  system  homeschool  philosophy  child's  and  beliefs  attitudes  cannot  whether  views  regards  alternate  and  on  of  choose  view  of  the  learner.  as  of  to of  one  programs  least  behalf  or  amongst  alternative  toward  those  that  the  literature  q u a l i t y - c o n s c i o u s consumer  their  discontent  The  with  values  of  i n attempting  homeschooIers  of  home s c h o o l "  Ware's  to  body  feel  for that  wiI I h a v e parent  philosophy  enamoured  of  with the  taking  feel  The  public  school  that  action  the  who  alternate  regular  system.  at  (Meighan,  results  parent  the  a  education  direct  must  control.  the  has  on  on the  child's  chooses system This  an  41. parent  may  also  the  parent's  The  problem  parents from  therefore and  of  Do  cast  believe  that  the*ir  fate  powerful  apart  not  events  This  1)  by  to  Whether  the three Do  child's  how  issues groups  parents  a c t i v e vote  each  of  Finally, by  are  degree  these which of  some d e g r e e  of  three  hold  remain  in  system,  or  future these  groups  differentiate  parents  who  that  educational  or  under  i s in parent  of them  differing  the  public  simply the  hands  groups  f a t a l i s m but  by  or  set  specific  educational which  can  philosophies  be  typified  who  choose  as  fall being  liberal,  conservative.  groups  of  parents  ('decision  differences  in their  groups')  differing  exhibit  endorsement  of  methods  systematic  educational  Iosophies. Whether the  of  family?  parental  education  a)  an  categories  Whether  phi  i s to  examine:  moderate  2)  these  others?  will  into  are  philosophy  unique  study  outcome  describe  education?  system  or  child's  i s to  what  another.  philosophies school  the  control.  differ  one  feel  these  group  philosophy  in of  decision their  groups  are  endorsement  education.  of  homegeneous a  within  particular  of  b)  Whether  there  between  3)  Whether values  4)  Whether values  are systematic  homeschooling  and s c h o o l i n g  the d e c i s i o n groups on a g e n e r a l  differ  parents.  with  locus of control  the d e c i s i o n groups on a  differences in belief  differ  locus of control  t o mean  instrument.  with  measure  regard  regard  t o mean  specific  to  child-  r e a r i ng.  5)  Whether  there  specific  6)  Whether by  This  m u l t i p l e case  study  utilizes  a Q~sort  between  choice  (1984)  interview parental  examined  and  three  their  schooling  locus of  about  are described  control  educational  i n an attempt  experiences,  choices.  philosophy,  t o probe t h e  parental  beliefs  and  i n schooling.  asserts that  contemporary  general  i s s u e s which  explain  o f 84 s t a t e m e n t s  a semi-structured  between  measures.  are specific might  parental  best  there  which  relationship  Yin  locus of control  parents  measures, and  i s a correlation  events  "how"  o f which  i n a case  a n d "why"  questions  the researcher  study.  which  focus  h a s no c o n t r o l  on  are  43  A case study i s an empirical Ca)  enquiry t h a t :  i n v e s t i g a t e s a contempory phenomenon w i t h i n i t s real l i f e context? when  <b)  the boundries between phenonmenon and context are not c l e a r l y e v i d e n t ; and  (c)  i n which  m u l t i p l e sources of evidence are used.  The sources of evidence u t i l i z e d t h r e e locus of c o n t r o l  ( Y i n , p.  23)  i n the present study are the  measures, the Q-sort and the semi-  structured interview.  The r e s e a r c h i t s e l f  fell  i n t o t h r e e p a r t s ; the c r e a t i o n  p i l o t i n g of a ' c h i l d - r e a r i n g  locus of c o n t r o l ' measure; a general  study i n v o l v i n g t h i r t y p a r e n t s who of  control  and  completed  a Q-sort and  locus  measures; and the i n t e r v i e w of the 'most  r e p r e s e n t a t i v e ' parents from each  group.  Instrumentation  Several  instruments were used  specifically  i n t h i s study, two  for i t . The design and p i l o t i n g of the C h i l d -  Rearing Locus of Control measure preceded study i n the p i l o t established  developed  study.  It was  locus of c o n t r o l  used  the main body of the  i n c o n j u n c t i o n with  two  measures, R o t t e r ' s I n t e r n a l - E x t e r n a l  Locus of Control instrument and Levenson's IPC.  Subsequently  a  44 Q-sort  was  quest ions  A)  developed wer e  and  refined.  Finally,  a  set  of  interview  chosen.  L2£yS_£'i_^ntroX (  - i •>  The  Ul*LJ^QILt<Hr__L~E_ScaJ_e,_and_the...Levenson_IPC  Rotter  scale  of  Internal-External  which  six  external  locus  of  control.  However,  reverse  so  therefore Levensen  The  from  respondant  The  or  -3  would  c o n s i s t s of  have  of  Scale  scores  internal  this  study  is a  with  the  29  item  indicate locus  of  i t was  indicate internal i t y  three  c o n s i s t i n g of do  scored  responsibility , or  this  High  scores  Chi I d r e a r i n g  subscales,  9  items  low  scored  in  and  LOC  on  a  the  Locus study  control  actions  of to  or for  and  the  on  to  +3  scores  internality  disagreement events  to  powerful  Control  measure  with  one's  imply items The  statements own  actions,  others.  is a  degree  child's  are  (strongly agree).  of  their  High  Powerful  L i k e r t - t y p e s c a l e with  i n d i c a t e the  over  Internal,  each.  scores  (strongly disagree)  Child-Rearing  Control  subscale.  i n d i c a t e s agreement  for  low  purposes  scores  Items a r e  chance  they  the  of  unscored.  and  e x c l u s i v e , nor  attribute  devised feel  high  IPC  externality.  luck  for  Chance,  mutually  which  control,  Internal  and  ranging  are  correlate positively  Levenson  Others not  that  items  Locus  to  12-item  scale  which  parents  behaviour  and  academic  achievement.  A  discussion  of  the  development  of  this  scale  folIows. Ci i ) Ihe_Pi_J_ot _ S t u d y j The  original  situations  instrument  Chi_]_dr e a r ioa_.Loc.us_.of ...Contro.l_  consisted  of  toward  regarding  or  attitudes  interpreted  as  being  could  be  under  the  control  of  chance  under  the  control  of  powerful  'bad  influences'.  to  those  used  of  control  by  of  one's  the  'internal'  was  c o r r e I a t ed  B>  with  areas  (1981)  child  were her  on  the  as  or  heredity  luck as  and  chosen  as  development  of  control as  scale.  This  IPC  scale  or or  paralle  her  locus  over  being  or  peers  being  the  similar  to  instrument  In t e r na I-E x t e r n a I L o c u s  Levenson's  parent  teachers?  Having  Levenson's  which  of  such  IPC.  18  control  i s conceptualized  Rot t e r ' s  1976)  in  Levenson  dimension  < Phares?  o f Con t r oI  (Levenson?  1981)  Ihe._Q-Sort '-  Qzd&tb.'2do.Loc_y_5  :  Q-methodoIogy rather  than  research or  the  such  others?  of  child-rearing  the  events  three  Levenson  measure?  development  Scale  These  under  descriptions  in  theories.  compared little Q-sorts  to  is a  form  items  into  which  on  of  one  also  ,  factor  the  1978 in  a  part  desirable  analysis  which  Q~methodoIogy  is testing  another on  PJ.i^~y._>_>L2Q  groups.  (Kerlinger?  confusion are  General  a  ) A  particular large  relatively of  since  the  subject  most  i s most  people  people  useful  explanatory  number short  factors  theory  of  items  can  time  and  with  (Nunnally? enjoy  doing  for  be  1967). them.  46  Q-sorts from  have  been  individual  (Cronbach?  to  investigate  responses  1955)  laboratories  used  to  to  p r e l i m i n a r y work  educational  t h e o r i e s from  believed used  Q-sort  compare they and  to  dichotomy?  be  what  Q-methodoIogy  to  did. to  they  was  with  classification and  beliefs  ' e x t e r n a l s ' as  conjunction  their  obedience  each  as  not  they  they  used  areas  in science  by  as  felt  who  the  using  control  on  persons Pease  (1986)  measures  parent'  differences  1984)  'progressive' vs.  G e l j a s and  'good  Samaroff which  does  between  to  with  what  'internals'  f e a t u r e s of  toward She  less  are  themselves  and  FeiI  parents  symbiotic?  children. are  in Kerlinger?  good  parents  did.  attitudes  educators  see  a  M a r i l y n Segal  those  methods  Q-sorts  group.  what  what  parents  about  while  about  on  locus of  'vignettes' to  of  of  treatment  derived his  based  found  also  parents  beliefs  themselves  of  he  They  said  perspectivistic. compare  which  i n conjunction with  themselves  were and  teaching  (as quoted  was  exemplars  parents  variety  1982).  Kerlinger's  'traditional'  wide  psychotherapeutic  describing  (Abraham?  a  categorical?  themselves concluded to  be  a as  that  with  as  She  do  mothers  in single-parent families  educators. put  in  their  compensating  30-item  Q-sort  educators parents  concerned  more c o n c e r n e d  matters  in  responded?  (1985) used  likely  (1985)  to  who  see  about  disciplinary also  more e m p h a s i s  on  found  that  47 competition process  and  may  relative  position  doing  of  items,  quarters  of  each  item  sort  the  the to  examines alI  one  sort  while  the  i n an  be  criteria  was  associated  with  against  items  another  in this  decreased. make  applying  are  fine  the  not  content.  One  does  the  are  scale-point to  the  with  sorter.  One  three-quarters  s t r o n g l y with  with  each  relative could  sorting  them,  i n mind  than  other,  another.  and  actually  c o n c e p t u a l i s e d as number  of  C19G7) c a u t i o n s  interpretations  inferential  disagree  a l l items  threeposition  of  conceivably  they  If the he  or  be  sorter  she  against  can  forms  which  comparing  an  every  one  other.  fashion the  Nunnally  unique  individuals  one  i s kept rather  Since  fashion.  of  before  which  value  agree  two  compared  cards  statement  of  SES  particular  however  identical  independent  the  may  these  are  any a  Since,  same,  i s compared,  to  higher  intensely  another  items.  items  have  may  statement  the  another,  will  Q-sort  i s the  conceived  implicit  a  cards  Although  If  that  have- s o m e d i s a d v a n t a g e s .  to  i n the  person the  and  goals.  •-methodology sorted  obedience  of  statistics better  to  the to  being  independent  degrees readers  of  problems  consider  freedom  that  probability  as  one  is  " I t i s best  values  concerning  them  of  rough  found the  not in  sample  guides  to  48 the  probable  stimuli  of  However,  the  one  wishes  1973.  to  is  iibiD  p.597)  The  and  Q-sort  rigourous  the  does can of  statements  Thus,  as  of  concerned the  These  same* null  freedom.  variance  the  amongst  mean variables  (Kerlinger,  1973.  appropriate.  s o r t s and, 84  on of  in  cards  categories,  final  drawn  educational (p.549)  pragmatic/Iiberal items  i t s  from  educational  Nunnally  'conservative', three  i f  the  of  r e l a t i o n s among  works  the  about  methodology,  works  conservative,  these  accept  be  has  degrees  be  (Kerlinger,  to  pilot  by  adopted  whether  more  in  be  F  of  an  Fischer's advice  of  c o n s i s t i n g of  suggested  r e s p e c t i v e l y as Each  are  the  of  becomes  value  sort,  "the  two  and  humanist/Iibertarian.  'liberal'.  one  found  romantic  this  population  i s important"  sort  categories  that  number  Q-sort  but  assuming  classified  of  to  the  from  surveys  format,  as  scores  education  large,  larger  forced  groups  structured  parent  structured  a  developed  a  a  critical  using  ipsative  about  philosophy,  In  fairly  suggests  should  unimportant  thus  was  the  used  collections  (p.553).  is  to  decreasing be  large  s i g n i f i c a n c e level  decision  items.  are  was  items  Kerlinger  i n d i v i d u a l s or  version,  A  on  kind."  inferences  lost.  differences  of  Increasing  approach  subjects  w  make  as  independence  and  more  effect  hypothesis This  a  p.595).  general  number  issue  and  f i n d i n g s over  same g e n e r a l  i f the  unimportant followed  g e n e r a l i t y of  were  was and  henceforth  'moderate' which  critics.  were  and the  devised  49 independent such  variables,  as t h e appropriate  competition, teacher, goals  list  t h e amount  t h e speed  type  of statements,  Appendix  IV  (. i i )  worded  and  pilot  Q-sort from  statements  (Page,  categories strongly  original  as a r e s u l t which  was  compiled  O'Neill's  reflecting  group  to  good  t h e long  g o a l s such  learn.  A  term as  complete  i s included  Q-sort  was  of their  of subjects  required  envelopes  complete  the card  critique,  in  sort.  These  Ideologies  to parents in  were s o r t e d  into  distribution  to the f i r s t  t h e item pool  was  and  and r e d u c e  104 s t a t e m e n t s  based  enlarged,  items  and  items  were A  second  on c a r d s w i t h t h e  individuals  cards correctly  ten subjects  ambiguity.  of explanation  Seventeen  to  the statement.  were dropped  letter  returned their  with  questions,  of importance  a quasi-normaI  readibility  and a  1987).  adminstered  were g i v e n  selected  Educational  issues  agrees  to sort  from  t o be o f i m p o r t a n t  into  the subject  t o improve  volunteered  seen  by s u b j e c t s  were d i f f i c u l t  rewritten  of a  PLLet_Studi.es  Page and Tremble,  The  how  according to topic  general  how  nebulous  areas  of  the curriculum,  learning  and t h o s e  on  the level  the q u a l i t i e s  t o meet  homeschooIers,  ten  Items c o v e r e d  <! f ) .  more s i m p l y ,  Inventory,  within how  grouped  The J3-Sor t :  original  of grouping,  of.change  s e t f--esteem  items.  of structure,  o f e d u c a t i o n , a s welI  creativity,  The  c o n t a i n e d 28  a s t o how  to  o f t h e twenty  sorted.  They  were  who  50 interviewed  briefly  instructions sorting  of their  eliminating between  they  returns  refining These  had  any  the c l a r i t y  particular  of the  problems  the final  categories, "least  beliefs".  led t o a r e d u c t i o n i n the item  those  final  of a structured  1 being my  or  groups.  comprised ten  whether  to ascertain  with  the cards.  Analysis  format  and  i n order  which like  were  my  Table  items  Q-sort  Q-sort.  items  were  and  d i d not  rewritten  the resulting  These  items  were  t h e dependent  beliefs"  3-1  which  and  indicates  to f i t the 84  items sorted  variables,  with  10 b e i n g  the frequency  by  discriminate  t o be  category  pool  into category  "most  like  of the rankings.  T a b I e 3-1 s E L S S t i S Q E Y._J21.J^  Categories 4 5  3  14  20  6  8  20  10  14  ( i i i ) _ J h e _ Q - S o r t±_ .Mai n _ S t ud_/ Initially,  plans  individuals subjects materials  called  living  were  f o r mail  responses  o u t s i d e t h e lower  leaving  be dropped  mainland.  f o r h o l i d a y s and o f f so they  only  could  requested mail  from  those  However, that  i t from  the  their  several  51 destination. subjects lunch,  It a l s o  became o b v i o u s  were r u s h i n g  tend  to  through  children,  or  to  w e r e t h e r e f o r e ctsked w h e t h e r be  left  they  with  would  preferred to  a  complete  prefer  to  set  do  slightly  been  C )_  to  to  the  the  higher  their  at  their  on  their  attrition  rate  to  the  time  than  do  Subjects  materials to  convenience to  the  prepare  chores.  prefer  time  own  instances  i n order  household  would  specific  i n some  or  whether  i t . Most  subjects  and  this  practice  led  might  have  otherwise  case.  LQ„ex.yJ^ew  "Probably  the  procedure  i s that  of  sort  Q-sort  they  them  a  the  that  the  central  questions  Carter,  1985,  information  of  i t allows and  p.3) from  value  both  answers The  the  about  to  of  the  their  reasons  for choosing  the  method  of  were a l s o  questioned  about  what  they  made,  and  Other  questions  whether  information felt  their  commitment program,  were,  their  they  attempted  about  child  educational to  i t .  whether  A  of  their  satisfaction  would to  consider probe  o p t i o n was  to  them  the  felt  any  of  actively  and  experiences,  choice  they  and  about  and  whether  the  had  options.  had  pursued  whether  they  their  the  of  they  other  and  chose.  motives  education,  asked  system  they  the  the  and  get  school  the  meaning  Brown  education  in jepoardy  question  i t appealed  local  with  how  development  final  explore  educational  their  parents  child,  own  perception of  other  research  i n t e r v i e w was  their  They  their  parties  a  i n v o l v e d . " (Brenner,  purpose  parents  i n t e r v i e w as  new  they  level  of  primary  thought  i t  would  appeal  shown  the factor  comment.  t o other  A copy  members o f t h e i r  array  fortheir  group.  factor  F i n a l Iy?  and were  of t h e i n t e r v i e w s c h e d u l e  they  were  asked t o  appears  i n Appendix  IV(a>.  Subjects  were  again  anonymous and t h a t any  time.  A copy  informed they  were  that  their  free  t o withdraw  of t h e consent  form  responses  appears  will  from  be  the study at  i n Appendix  III  .  Sjamp.li.ng A>  T h e „P i . Lot _S t u d i_e s '- ^ !2£Y„L*l„f!i^  Measure  :  Thirty-two large to  employees?  urban  public  participate  and?  children any  who a t t e n d e d  district.  two  age?  the  between  lived  only  surveys  sampled  individuals  domain  geographic  with  children  asked  the three were  middle'  avoiding  of  elementary  t o volunteer? were  The f i n a l  however  included. and t h e eventual  t o be p r e d o m i n a t e l y  volunteers that  was p o s s i b l e .  volunteered  t o one school or  o l dchildren  was e x p e c t e d  of a  areas? had  thereby  v o l u n t e e r s were male?  t o t h e male  i fthis  this  schools?  unique  4 1/2 a n d 13 w e r e  t o be s t u d i e d  from  i n diverse  fourteen year  parents?  o f whom 2 9 c o m p l e t e d  many d i f f e r e n t  28 o f t h e o r i g i n a l  was sugge-sted  study  of confounding  Initially  population it  bias  subjects with  Because  they  p r o c e s s i n g department  a l l o f whom w e r e  Individuals  because  problems  school  utility?  i n the pilot  questionnaires. class  i n t h e data  their sample  wives  female? complete  consisted of  i=:o 25  females  they 14  had  and  the  and  4  males.  children  one  A l l but 1/2  and  13?  indicate  the  age  range  subjects received  the  Rotter  and  half  Control  measure  first  measure  first.  Subsequently  IPC  the  4  between  d i d not  three of  two  subjects had  of  children  who  were  his children.  Internal-External  the  indicated  Child-rearing  Locus  Locus  a l l s u b j e c t s completed  Half  of  of  Control  Levenson's  scale.  (. i i ) ._|3eve]_orjment _ o f „t.he _Q-Sor t The  original  selected examine to  group  to  include  the  ensure  that  the  two  themselves has  with  no  her  involving age  Neither  system.  Each  was  to  were r e v i e w e d sort.  of  whom  man  nine  discuss the  was  expertise who  were  i s retired?  a  and  been  and a  one  to  were  critically  'non-experts'  have  what  actively  matters two  men?  computer  to a  or  researcher with  she the  was  those  preschool  at  manager  with  i n the and  who  issues  retired  doing;  subject  public  parent?  specialist  involved  to  involved  'non-informed'  actively  he  three  Montessori  administered individually  aloud  Q-sort  subjects included  children  had  with  the  were r e a s o n a b l y c o m p r e h e n s i b l e  i n school  children?  sort  by  her  develop  individuals  ' p a r e n t s who  involvement  children.  the  original  'informed  school  asked  and  statements  one  to  individuals  i n e d u c a t i o n a l matters?  limited  personally  both  The  teachers?  teacher?  s u b j e c t s used  statements  non-educators. school  of  education  the the  the  sorter items  end  of  54 A revised  version  of the Q-sort  10 m o t h e r s  whose p r e s c h o o l  Montessori  preschool  Montessori  elementary  program needs  B• >  directors?  children  were  enrolled  a n d who h a d n o c h i l d r e n program  workers)  at a  local  i n the public  a n d 10 p r e s c h o o l  and one-to-one  groups?  staff  at a  (teachers?  local  special  preschool.  J h e_ Ma i.n._St u d y  There  were 30 s u b j e c t s  groups  of parents!  schoolers study  their  The  i n total  a n d 10 t r a d i t i o n a l  by b e i n g  subjects  referred  schooling support  were  three  alternate  In k e e p i n g  selected  by o t h e r  from  10 M o n t e s s o r i  schoolers.  support  group  were  selected  groups.  with  as exemplars  case  of  members o f t h e group?  to Christian  Individuals  referred  t o as the "Christian  their  or by  homeschooIing either  through  newspaper.  group?  a third  individuals  home s c h o o l  from  party.  This  t h e lower  from  support  after  group? mainland  Church  this  group  The second  group  a r e a o f B.C.  and p u b l i s h e s  heard  a  their  a  who was n o t c o n n e c t e d  having  which  offers  group a r e  t h e Ridge-Meadows  One i n d i v i d u a l ?  volunteered  t w o home-  wishing t o educate  homeschoolers". from  from  Community  recruited  was s e l e c t e d  has a secular  volunteers  Life  families  a t home.  homeschoolers  from  T h e New  children  with  selected  volunteering.  home s c h o o l e r s  which  who w e r e  10 home s c h o o l e r s ?  methodology?  group?  of  was a d m i n i s t e r e d t o t w o  of the study  ultimately  included  o f B.C. a n d s o u t h e r n  55 Vancouver  Island  homeschoolers. members  those  This  w r i t i n g s of  The  Christian  editor  area  was  who  were  Holt  and  of  asked  the  included  the  an  committed  homeschoolers?  school or  and  have  to  who  had had  sent  another that  measure  system year  this  child  from  rather final  would  than sample  public  son  who  had  would with for  because the  begun  parent one  school she  that  had  public  In  at and be  child.  she  home-schooled  had  years? to  This  child  as  was  a  public  of  planning  also  hoped  'deviant'?  her to  11)  homeschooler. youngest  work  f o r many  i n grade  1/2  i n some s e n s e  committed  because  those  particular  was  had  only  a  was  who  of  public  1  withdrew  child a  group  the  task  the  to  planning  I t was  who  a  in  their  formidable  of  Ridge-Meadows  eligible.  to  church  volunteer.  that  were  for  deschooters.  order  least  return  parents  parent  school  in the  withdrawn  their  to  as  sympathy  outline  children  would  likely  the  an  decided  for  have  in their  constituted  school  i n the- F a l l ?  who  contained  because had  to  to  had  like  letter.  homeschooling  faced  because  given  would  sampled  child  and  group  newsletter  in the  eliminate those  elementary  However?  members  likely  comparable  a  school  schooling  school  as  elementary  parents but  or  initially  their  when of  met  more  with  i t was  been  eliminate those  school  no  be  occurred,  individuals  home e d u c a t i o n  temporary  age  who  never  continue  the  to  1981)  homeschooler*s  that  'non-aligned  familiar  study  advertisment  the  felt  were  i f any  ascertain  individuals  as  (1976,  homeschool e r s  weeks b e f o r e  requirements The  John  to  group  parents  the  several  i s referred  full  years  ? had  child  The in  time. t'.a c o l l e g e -  kept  her  next  56 oldest  child  return  to full-time  to  meet  out of school  non-aligned  dropped  dropped  final  support  t h e mothers  southern  sample  were  Vancouver  When c o m m u n i c a t i n g stressed  her  of being Christian  Of  as  contain group  from  of  five  t h e lower  with  as a  I t was  that  more  I t was  revealing  and  nine  Christian  and  one  parents,  one  of the subjects  were  to return the survey from  and  the  on  Christian  mothers. three  Seven  were  from  felt  somewhat  hoped  the researcher also  answers  hoped from  the researcher  a s i t was  registration  educator.  they  'parent'  o f t h e new  perceived  four  the homeschoolers,  the  they  of the  criterion  mainland  that  if  considered  homeschoolers  non-aligned  homeschooIers  homeschooIers.  s h e was  to  committed  mothers  five  intended  Island.  identity  unveiling  and  the non-aligned  failure  and  a  Two  t h e commitment  such  time  i n the f a l l ,  the result  for reasons  this  recruited.  the study.  o u t , and  homeschooling of  was  d i d n o t meet  out d u r i n g  The  of eight  homeschoolers  usuabIe  time.  homeschooling  A total  homeschooIers  not  during  the underlying c r i t e r i o n  homeschooler.  person  even  they  under  this  seige  might  the traditional  rather  of  forthcoming than  might  and  some  for  be more  approach  by  as a r e s u l t  requirements  as a parent  that  suggested  an  also  elicit  Montessori  parents.  Traditional  and  Montessori  Elementary  School  parents  in District  #43.  were chosen District  from  #43  was  Harbourview chosen  57 because  i t has  program  has  been  years.  The  Harbourview  enrolls  local  children  AlI  who  had  attend  or  below  fashion  of  the  who  had  program. of  the  was  as  to and  parents  were  door  the  to  PTA  enter  she  not  and  executive  against  was  had  not  she  happy  register through by  to  'word  her  of  their  and  she  i s to be  and  i t .  younger  the  had  chosen child  in  been  volunteer  to  participate  in a  study  on  express.  great  she  traditional  flyers  who and  had  served  parent  themselves, Montessori  w e r e wiI I i n g  educational A  as  aware  places,  like  who  not  These  c h i l d r e n in the parents  parents  i t .  Parents  who,  the  traditional  not  in particular  persons  of  r e j e c t e d were  in public  mouth'.  the  ensure  Those  the  have  in  aware  to  those  to  four  the  in  child  that  wished  as  child  r e g i s t e r e d her  assumed  they  to  'chosen'  was  opinion  one  This  were  It  an  past  status  least  program.  had  the  children only  while  notices  suggest  placing  at  considered  program  when  The  neighbourhood  opportunity  were s o l i c i t e d  were a s k e d  decided  an have  they  program  recruited door  to  this  as  had  representing.  had  for  class  their  indicated that  area,  would  to  volunteers had  are  parent  the  program  on  they  Montessori  new  sent  group  and  School  years.  program.  respondents  parents  10  socio-economic  educated  subjects  One  similar  have  applied  for  middle  and  alternative  considered  is a  Montessori  school  neighbourhood  Montessori  area  the  program  i n Harbourview  c h i l d r e n of  3  that  Montessori  located  traditional  Grade  a  to  philosophies  number  of  parents  had  attempted  especially potential of  the  The  to  within  s u b j e c t s had  through  a  parents  i f they  participating they  thought  Montessori youngest the  executive their  on  parent  i n the  to  take  child  any  years of  from  be  the  parent  the  an  who  to  or  recruited  Unfortunately,  the  however,  Each  volunteer  someone  one  of  below.  i n Grade  was  in  and  i n v o l v e d on  who  the  The 4  and  the  schooled  since preschool, homeschooled  was  Montessori  i n v o l v e d had  had  None  a  none child  or  program.  was  individuals circles.  impediment  been  A l l but  f a m i l y was  program  pool.  interested  3  many  home.  themselves  ideas.  a  teacher  eliminated. This  some M o n t e s s o r i  be  All parents  traditional  was  might  program,  result,  published,  actively  Montessori  i n education to  was  at  have  i n Grade  remaining  years.  i n the  a  contamination  children  a  subject  volunteered.  different  who  for several  had  considered  had  in that  a  prevalent  have  to  not  ideas  children  five  was  executive  the  as  Newletter.  similar  had  removed  past  Montessori  who  a  a l l cases,  initially  Montessori,  and  children  who  parents  child  from  their  newletter  in  years  someone  had  In  were  the  might  of  two  knew o f  child  child  the  children  eliminated  educated  parents  of  their  previous  notice in the  edition  several asked  the  s u b j e c t s were  Montessori  final  register  as  training  was  naive  to  and  had  taught  prevent  theory  with  in  the  the those  theories  Montessori  training  was  not  i t i s not  uncommon  for  parents  after  enrolling  their  child  in  59 preschool.  Invariably parents  method  before  create  their  Table  taking  the courses,  enamoured  rather  than  of the Montessori  having  the courses  philosophy.  3-2 d e s c r i b e s t h e a g e s  groups.  become  There  Tab I e 3-2: _?i_P.ar e n t s  and numbers  i s no s i g n i f i c a n t  of children  difference  between  i n the three groups.  Mean_number__an  Mean  HomeschooIer s <n==10>  Mon t e s s o r i <'.n==10>  Tr ad i t iona I <n=iO>  Number o f Children  3.1  2.4  2.6  8.4  7.9  6.7  Age o f Children in Years.  C)  SeJ_ e c t i o n _ o f _ P a r e n t s _ t g _ B e _ _ _ I n t e r v i e w e d  Those  parents  individuals It  from  on e a c h  was a r b i t r a r i l y  loading  each  group  who w e r e  of the factors decided  o f .60 o n a  factor  that  U l t i m a t e l y , twelve  interviewed,  two n o n - a l i g n e d  parents.  three  chosen  a subject  individuals  homeschoolers,  Montessori  parents,  loading  as interviewees.  should  t o be c o n s i d e r e d  individual.  homeschoolers,  were  the highest  have  a  minimum  a 'representative' were two  chosen  t o be  Christian  and f i v e  traditional  These the  individuals  initial  sort  interviewed a  and  test-retest  interviewees moving  out  to sort  from  each  five  The  asked  i f they  were  the  would  and  agreed  two  person  Three  from  which each  other  willing  the  to  be  i n order  to  Eleven  person  a  IV  i n the  parent  the  Factor  but  individuals  Factor  of  from  interview  p a r e n t s and  partook  t h r e e weeks  cards  Q-sort. One  from  of  be  the  to the  chosen  group  individuals  so.  Montessori  was  would  resort  for the  t o do  cards.  final  i f they  able  town  group,  replacement cards.  and  contacted approximately  reliability  of  time  were  obtain  twelve IV  d i d not  were  after  was have  asked,  homeschooIer. to  re-sort  re-sort  one .  A  the  consisted  of  groups.  Da. t a,_An a l_ys i s Data  1>  were  analysed  whether  to  the  groups  corresponding c 3.t e g o r i e s 2)  whether  3)  what  4)  which one  5)  which one  6)  two items  of  whether  the  main  by  items  or  the  decision  the  described  to  of  parents  features factor  were  ranked  the  were  within  load of  ranked  the  three  or  on  each  factors  theoretical liberal).  different factor  factors.  array  analysis. significantly  philosophical  decision  into  mod e r a t e  groups  the  of  fall  three hypothetical  (. c o n s e r v a t i v e ,  the  are  discerns  higher  or  lower  by  or  lower  by  groups.  significantly  higher  groups. individual  factor  array,  significantly  61 higher  scores  are given  (conservative, whether to  favoured 7)  whether  moderate  the cards  different  have  criteria  by each  or  or  Iiberal)  been  sorted  i e . which  factor  any p a r t i c u l a r  moderate,  t o one p h i l o s o p h i c a l  liberal)  over  stance  the others  randomly  or  philosophy,  according  i f any, i s  array. philosophy  (conservative,  i s receives significantly  factor  or  rankings  on o n e  array  over  compared  with  each  other,  significantly  more  conservative,  i s any  other  factor  factor  array  more  liberal  higher arrays i e .  or  more  pragmat i c. 8)  whether in  the d e c i s i o n groups  their  mean  instruments variance 9) w h e t h e r in  scores  are significantly  on g e n e r a l  as determined  locus  by a one-way  and a m u l t i p l e c o n t r a s t the d e c i s i o n groups  their  mean  scores  on a  specific  to child-rearing  analysis  of variance  of  control  a n a l y s i s of  o f means  procedure.  are significantly  locus  different  of control  as determined  different  instrument  by a  one-way  and a m u l t i p l e c o n t r a s t  of  means  procedure. 10)  the degree locus  11)  of control  the internal locus  12)  of c o r r e l a t i o n  consistency  of control  whether  parents,  incidents  measures  measures when  between  general  of the pilot of both from  their  the pilot refer  choice  specific  sample.  t h e general  interviewed,  as motivating  and  and  specific  sample. to  specific  of schooling.  62 13)  whether  parents  education  who  or c h i l d  actively  seek  development  information  a r e more  about  likely  to  choose  i an  a l t er nat e  14) w h e t h e r  parents  jeopardy 15)  whether the  Yin  there  All  technique  are three  three  divisions  may  new  their  group  ungraded  "pattern  or p h i l s o p h i c a l group primary  matching"  study  research.  c)  alternate schooler represent  be r e f l e c t e d  upon  parental  Q sort.  or modify  beliefs,  v. r e g u l a r  i n the results There  the results  as the degree  chiIdrearing.  that  of  parent  schooler.  b e h a v i o u r a l Iy  philosophy.  as well  seem  v.traditionaI  defined  of the  are also  theoretical  the Iiberal/moderate/conservative  educational  t o support  real  I t would  patterns are:  deschooler  v.  favours  data  possible patterns  schooler  as  such  as a s u i t a b l e  b)  philosophies  i s in  program.  v. M o n t e s s o r i  may  system  loyalty.  "naturally occuring"  which  such  educational  a) h o m e s c h o o l e r  used  about  greater  for case  of these  underlie  issues  feel  The n a t u r a l l y o c c u r i n g  educational patterns  who  any d e c i s i o n  proposed  philosophy.  on  feel  (1984) d e s c r i b e s  analysis  f o r m o f educ a t i on.  The p a r e n t  which  interview  can be  of t h e Q-sort  as to provide  t o which  triad  parents  data  by  enlarging  independently  sought  information  It  i s intended  the  factors  which  alternative  Data  was  designed 1986).  motivate  could  parents  then  to  be  generated  home s c h o o l  or  regarding  to  choose  programs.  analyzed to  LERTAP  the  between  eac h 5  of  Systems)  (SAS  for  of  ease  rest  the  Rotter  and  Powerful  polarity  of  and  was  Others left  Child-rearing was  felt  resulting  study.  See  package  LOC to  which  Appendix  which  Internal  the  high  IV  scale  the was  for the  was  high  related  internal  can  also  C o r r eI a t i o n s the  three  Analysis  scored  scores and  in  correlated  the  Child-  substantially  correlated  negatively  positively item  with had  the  h i g h l y with  the  rest  correlation apparent utilized  of  this  direction i n the scales.  item of  main  with  Chance  which  complete  reverse  correlated  or  One  Enson,  correlation  subscale  neither or  an  (Statistical  that  and  indices  and  the  Rotter  i t correlated  outweigh  12-item  SAS The  were d e l e t e d .  and  Rotter  using  Internal  subscale  i n as  Lertap  package  (Galen  1986.) a n d  test.  i n order  Levenson  surveys  "computes  (Carter,  1982).  items  the  and  computer  e xt er n a I c r i t er i on.  Levenson  the  and  calculated  computer  Those  i s a  (Child-rearing,  were  the  item  entire  an  Institute,  with  LOC.  the  scale  with  measures  the  the  which  tests  item."  interpretation  positively  with  i t em  from each  for  subscales!)  procedure  rearing  each  measure  the  Levenson  of  LERTAP,  data  analyzes  quality  c or r e l a t e  using  analyze  consistency  The  hypotheses  Ib.e._Pi.Let ...Study.  A)  to  that  wrong of  with  the part  the the  item. of  the  64 B> A  Ib*_Main_Stud^ one-way  Control  ANOVA  measures  differences using  Version  to  conducted  the  2.0).  used  to  on  the  a s c e r t a i n whether three  (Statistic  Release was  was  between  SPSS-X  method  and  groups  Package The  for  results  there on  were  any  Social  of  of  which  the  five  Sciences  means were  Locus  of  significant  Neuman-KeuIs M u l t i p l e  discover  the  -  measures  Extended  Comparison  significantly  d i f ferent»  The  i  _______ _°. j..o o.y  30  s u b j e c t s were each  educational labels white also  philosophy  attached  to  letter-size had  a  3"  number  category.  The  extreme  1.  The  1 one ask  envelope  envelopes  the  left.  statement?"  items  person  that  They  goes  were t o l d  therefore  be  and  laid  much  traditionally  education  10  as  the  which  "least out  were like  were  taught on  in  an  example  considered  84 1  They  statements x 3  were  a l s o given  1 to  number  10.  (eg.  be  my  5  beliefs" right  instructed  to  read  beliefs  that  schools  families. that  in  that  for  with  my envelope  envelope  cards  and  education  'education'  meant  rather  the  than  education'  read'  because  is  those  type  of  Individuals interviewed 'learning to  10  envelope  like  the  about  Avery  cards)  "most  to  own  1/2"  Each  placed  labelled  like  about-  1/2"  left  my  'formal  on  could  from  told by  of  from  c a t e g o r i e s were  were  "How  typed cards.  below  cards  Subjects  themselves  this  of  were  deck  numbered  phrase  the  the  index  envelopes  bracketed  for  which x 5"  indicating  beliefs"  shown  in  would  i t has  been  traditionally manners' They  It  place  them  not  remember  to  compare  they  believed  them  that  they  to  piles  'yes'  'no'  to  divide  s u b j e c t s were  asked  to  place the  envelope the  of  was  scores  when  letter  the  30  reduced  to  a  to  rotation  was  to  responses  the  the  individual set  of  loading  which  individual's resulting  a  30  the  i s now  beliefs  as  Now,  raw  scores  for  are  the  home.  statements system  the  and  to  to  cards  sure'  the  at  hold.  and  then  go  ten c a t e g o r i e s .  i n the  appropriate  sort.  App€*ndix  x 84  matrix  of  raw  correlation  matrix  of  individual's  This correlation analysis  FACTO  of  a  of  Q-sort  factor by  on  The  a  mail.  scores.  was  varimax  result  of  this  according  cards.  of  people  sharing  rankings  i s given  a  of  that  factor.  by  factor  Q~  using  on  the  Each  h i s weighting  the  a  the  weight  i s t h e r e f o r e based  on  by  matrix  individuals  tht'ir  multiplied  all individuals  using  C1983).  individual  has  responded  III  30  a  T h i s weight  individual scores  of  taught  who  indicated  each  into  'factors'  deck  part  r/(. 1 - r ^ ) . the  of  'not  table  parents  component UBC  good  school  cards  another.  program  to  those  x 30  one  them  the  through  and  completed  created  creation  statements. formula  to  principal  using  common  sent  with  rotation  their  had  sorts  correlated  subjected  they  the  read  again  Results  the  to  'learning  i t is traditionally  those  in three  the  contains  sort  because  while  cards  white  Each  in schools,  admonished  suggested  through  This  not,  beliefs,  was  The  would  were  their  taught  are  and  the  averaged  66 for  each  item.  can  then  be  purpose sort,  Having  ranked.  data  the  factor  simple* Thus  which  as  of  given  (1985)  to  items  sorted.  The  next  items  a  a  Thus?  two  receives  1.  determined rankings  array there  .01)?  a  is was  and  set  that  of  by  block  to  each  of  28  to  as  sort"  'ideal'  sort  highest down  be  see  i f there  each  of  of  be  z-score  the  the*  factor  items  i s given  factor  array  and  had  KeuIs  MuItipIe  which  a  been 10?  the which  i t can  determine  'liberal'.  d i f f e r e n c e between  590)  rank  significantly  or  be higher i f that In  philosophies  Comparison  to  an  z-score  arrays  one  difference in  they  receives  therefore  'moderate*'  p.  array.The  lowest  28  significant  the  is  using  is a  can  analogous  1973.  examined  would  to  which  because* t h e r e  is directly  levels  on  determine  in a  can  they  'conservative'? a  an  persuasions?  v a r i a n c e . " (Ker I i n g e r »  the so  three  This  different  for  which  general  manner  results  themselves  Student-Neuman  conducted  favoured  9  i f any  within  with  z-scores  Minitab  this  cover  structured  are* r e s c o r e d ? item  the  In  liberal?  procedure*  the  ordered  Each  using  into  created.  way  arrays  varience  means s c o r e s  was  done  a n a l y s i s of  factor  analysis  <  converted  variable classification.  the  where  is  and  ""one  one-way  factor  was  are  attempt  moderate  described of  This  array?  questions  basis  averages  analysis- system  conservative? be  These  of  the  philosophical position  case (p.  means was  factor.  items  can  also  be  compared  across  the  clusters.  Thus,  i t can  higher  be  seen  rankings  t h ereby  to  more c o n s e r v a t i v e , there  was  (g_ <  .01),  a  a  to  from  another.  The  one  raw  items  were a l s o  d e c i s i on  gr oup,  gives  F-ratio  significant  parent  select  questions  Montessorians and  for  also  and to  clusters  (the  Multiple  Comparision  gr oups  f or  to  an  than  f  were  any  for  indicating  This  which  method  was  used  program  was  d i f f e r enc e s .  Again  of  is item  item  compare  84 by  p r o g r am  a by  the to  homeschoolers,  (the d e c i s i o n  discriminated the  was  the  utilized  the  cases  different  This  that  parents,  to  In  means  each  i f their  given  questions  groups).  the  each  p r o g r am.  f  clusters  clusters  of  B r eakdown  traditional  phi I isophical.  other.  significantly  subjects  rankings  other  i s s i g n i f i c an 11y  ANOVA, o f  item  select  s i gn i f i c a n t  c I u s t er  d i s c r i m i n a t e d between the  the  one-way  respondants. which  do  significantly  d i f f e r e n c e between  thirty  SPSS-X each  than  liberal  groups  d i f f e r e n c e i n the  of  groups)  the  subjected  items  gives  M u l t i p l e Comparison  which  by  u s i ng  groups  the  or  significant  given  array  p ar t i c u I a r  moderate  determine  scores  an  i f an y  Neuman—Keuls  conducted  factor  conservative  d e t e r m i n i ng  where  i f any  between  Neuman-Keuls the  means o f  the  68  CHAPTER IV RESULTS: LOCUS OF CONTROL AND Q-SORT  Qyeryiew  The  r e s u l t s of the study  the  locus of c o n t r o l  The  locus of c o n t r o l measures d e s c r i b e d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e  instruments,  t h r e e groups of parents their  a r e embodied i n t h r e e types of measure,  i n t h e i r sense of c o n t r o l over events i n  l i v e s and the d e s t i n y of t h e i r c h i l d r e n .  was administered  on the same occasion  measures, gave parents  an o p p o r t u n i t y  statements about educational group  the Q-sort and the i n t e r v i e w .  beliefs.  (Homeschooler, Montessori  highest  as the locus of c o n t r o l t o compare and rank The two parents  or T r a d i t i o n a l )  loading on each f a c t o r were interviewed  It was a r b i t r a r i l y decided factor was r e q u i r e d  The Q - s o r t , which  various  from each  who had the at a l a t e r  date.  that a minimum loading of .60 on a  for a parent  t o be considered  ' r e p r e s e n t a t i v e ' of her group on the f a c t o r .  The subsequent  i n t e r v i e w s , which a r e d i s c u s s e d  i n Chapter V, were compared for  i s s u e s which would lend support  for d e s c r i p t i o n s of the f a c t o r s ,  and  for i n d i c a t i o n s of s i m i l a r i t i e s or d i f f e r e n c e s between  f a c t o r s or parental  E'ii2i_Study^ The  original  internal  ChjU dr  groups.  earing_Locus_oi_ControX  18-item Chi I d r e a r i n g Locus of Control  r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f e c i e n t CHoyt estimate  y i e l d e d an  of r e l i a b i l i t y )  of  .52.  The  yielded used of  a  final  reliability  resulted  these  version,  in  three  five*  subscale  measures  i s reported  moderate  good  T a b l e 4-1s measures i n  Rotter I/E  4-2  reports  the  of  between  these  scales  Control  measure  Chance  (12  revised  Levenson Chance  of  version  of  the  iterns). of  scores subscale  Powerful  Others the  in  reliability  twenty-nine  The* r e s u l t s  indicate  scores.  for  locus  of  Child-rearing LOC (18 i t e m s )  between  (18  control  C h i I d ~ r e*ar i ng LOC (12items)  i t ems)  .60  the  four  study and  and  t he  the  Child-rearing  Locus  Results  indicate  high  the  and  measure  Rotter  subscales  measure*  and  correlate*  and  negatively  with  with that  i s superior  that  to  of scores  positively  scores  the  Child—  c o r r eI a t i o n s  revised  Control on  measures  internal  the* p i l o t  measur e  for  three  form,  .52  correlations  Locus  Internal Internal  and  The  group  all  The  .76  C o n t r oI  Child-rearing  Levenson  for  administered  Loc us  high  .60.  T a b l e * 4-1.  .85  r ear ing  with  i t s truncated  scores.  this  Levenson Powerful  sea I e s / s u b s c a I es  the  in  of  of  Hoyt e s t i m a t e of r e l i a b i l i t y p i l o t study (N=23)  .54  T£*b I e  for  reliability  Levenson Internal  .85  spite  coeffecient  individuals to  in  on  Levenson  the  12-iterns  the  original.  the  on  70  T a b I e 4-2: C o r £ e j a t i o n _ ^ measures and _ four l p c u s _ o j [ _ . c o n t r o l wieasures_~_Pi, I o t _ S t u d y  Rotter I/E  Levenson Internal  .26  .13  -.20  -.28  .38  .34  -.23  -.38  Chi I d r e a r i n g LOC ( 1 8 i t e m s ) C h i I d r e a r i ng LOC ( 1 2 i t e m s )  As  a result  of the pilot  Chi I drear i n g Locus moderate with  Control as  of Control  reliability  other  locus  locus  „§.L*l„§t_udy_:  of control  t o measure  r e s u l t s o f an a n a l y s i s  the  locus  obtained Chance  Scale  Levenson  The C h i I d r e a r i n g  t h e same u n d e r l y i n g  (ANOVA)  a r e summarised groups  Powerful  and t h e ChiI d r e a r i n g  Internal  direction Locus of construct  Measur e s  d i f f e r e n c e s between  were no s i g n i f i c a n t  format) had  i n the appropriate  of variance  measures  on t h e L e v e n s o n  (12-item  the  measures.  L o c u s _o f _ C o n t r o J  The  Significant  measure  Levenson Chance  concluded that  measures.  of control  of control  i t was  and c o r r e l a t e d  measure a p p e a r s  do o t h e r  study,  Levenson Powerful  (N=29)  i n Table  a t t h e .05  Others Scale, Locus  d i f f e r e n c e s between  and t h e R o t t e r  of the scores  scales.  on  4-3.  level  were  t h e Levenson  of Control  Scale.  the groups  on t h e  There  71  One  subject  had a s c o r e  explained  that  Christian  beliefs  herself?  and, s i n c e  arose  her group.  homeschooler sort Her  locus  This  found?  or whether  they  who  however?  were  subject? should  despite  measures  that  the i d i o s y n c r a t i c nature  be r e t a i n e d .  control  a n d i t was d e c i d e d  Further  with  such  comments subjects  than  actions. affected  representative  another  had not c o r r e c t l y f o l l o w e d  measures?  o f them  rather  and another  were  eliminated  She  t o her  t o h e r own  be e l i m i n a t e d  r e c a l c u l a t i o n of r e s u l t s d i d not affect  significance  Scale.  i n d i v i d u a l ' s responses  a n d who h a d b e e n  of control  reference  was r e c a l c u l a t e d u s i n g  (non-aligned)  instructions?  this  she should  T h e ANOVA  Internal  God c o n t r o l l e d h e r l i f e ?  a s t o how  homeschooler  i t with  t o attribute control  r e s u l t s and whether  Christian of  s h e had completed  s h e was u n a b l e  Some c o n c e r n the  o f 3 on t h e L e v e n s o n  from  t h e Q-  t h e sample.  completed  correctly.  t h e F'-tests  or t h e  the original  of her responses?  on t h e u s e o f l o c u s o f are included  i nt h e  discussion.  Table  4-4  Contrasts  i n d i c a t e s t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e Newman-Keuls Procedure  differences on  Chance  these  factors.  groups.  and Powerful  forces  indicate  between  for the three  a greater  degree  In c o n t r a s t ?  As p r e v i o u s l y  Others  do n o t p l a y  t e s t s having  suggest  a part  i n their  scores  significant  indicated?  the individual  of attribution  high  Multiple  lives?  low  scores  feels  that  while  high  scores  o f outcome's t o t h e s e  on t h e Chi I d r e a r i n g  Locus of  72 Control affect  indicate  confidence  the child's  i n one's  behaviour?  ability  intellectual  as a parent t o  accomplishments and  personality.  T a b I e 4--3s A n a  tl_____b.__Li.__?  l^s_s__!_va^  Source of v a r i a t i on  Sum o f Squar es  Rotter Between Groups  39.2557  Wi t h i n Groups  238.9000  i _Q„_I____1___Q_i  df  Within Groups  Rat i o  19. 6S  27  7000  27  __„___S_______l_L_Q_b_L_ Between Groups  364.0667  2  Wi t h i n Groups  1313.4000  27  ________ __b_Q__  Between Groups  442.0667  Wi t h i n Groups  546.9000  _bLL___„____ B e t ween Groups  104.4667  Wi t h i n Groups  82.5000  *£=<.05  **B=<.01  182.  4682  .6311  1.7421  .0368*  48.6444  10.9122  0003**  17.0945  .0000**  20.25E  52.  27  .1282  71.9778  221,  27  2.2189  71.7998  G7.4000  1943.4000  P r ob,  Mean  ________ _. _______ L Between Groups  _______  3•0556  7  T a b I e 4-4: R e s u l t s _ o f _ S t u d e n t - N ^ ^ i£^y„_*J.„_ont^ l£___:__2Q__.±_£___s_  Gr o u p  Traditional  Montessor i  1 HomeschooIer s  <n=io:>  <n=io:>  Measure Levenson Powerful  others 19.00  .1Q__  _4_00.  Levenson Chance M  4.6  14. 0 0  Chi I d r e a r i n g M  No_e. Means w h i c h under I i n i ng.  A  _____  5_9.  factor  The  analysis  fifth  -.29961  factor  10.00  a r e not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t  o f t h e 84 was  a n d +.47604?  a  item  'junk'  Q-sort  factor  the majority  of  resulted  with  in 5  loadings  loadings  are joined  factors.  between  falling  between  by  74 .20  and  4-5  records  As  +20.  The the  item  at  an  These  factor  individuals and  4-7  Thirteen the  array  the  on  that  those less  items  non-aligned  10  through  Montessori  approved  of  z=-1.00  loaded  the  and  atmosphere  goals,  and  those  stances.  f o c u s i n g on Factor  homeschoolers. proposed  keeping as  cluster  such  cluster  citizens  rejected  Factor  'ideal  I.  (that  sort'  belief  did  statements  tradition the  not  and  5  background  and  persons  suggesting  all  5  This  7  of  cluster  f o c u s i n g on his  this  a  own  cluster  authoritarian  any to  real  of  the  support life  three liberal  experiences  conservative goals  with  array.  Christian  favour  It tended  item  not  develops by  4-6  than  group),  parent.  rejected  only  more  included  support  child  group.  Tables  their  These  Homeschool  the  on  each  for  V. of  to for  that  i s , a l l those  from  beliefs  z-score  i t by  factor  learning  and  a  i n Appendix  each  Beliefs  stances. as  with  1 Traditional  a l l and  s t r u c t u r e i n the good  on  religion,  had  This  methods  creating  This  II  philosophical  pragmatic  for  i n which  interests.  calculated  received z-scores  moderate  child-centred  were  and  were  given  an  listed  Christian  parents  scores  represent  which  i n t e r p r e t a b I e . T a b Ie  factors.  preference  are  were  factor  homeschooIers  liberal  values  four  each  of  factor  individuals,  recruited  for  which  than  the  factors  weighted  level  arrays,  list  z=+1.00 o r  the  item  indicated  four  l o a d i n g s on  previously described,  arrive  of  remaining  high  that  moral  and and  such  standards.  education  must  be  run  by  need  experts  adult  parents  3  particular? curriculum  of  and  remaining  like  moderate  beliefs  The  results  not  hold  Factor  cluster  preferred  was  unique  rejected  guide  loaded  their  on  in giving  parent  as  liberal?  and  that  This may and  moderate  individuals in  each  decision  suggests choose that  c h i l d r e n may  or  that  differing  conservative the  who  loaded hold  educational  i n d i v i d u a l s choosing hold  study?  differing  the  beliefs.  four on  to  sets  for  in  of  more t h a n  paths  reform.  could  that?  similar  and  groups  which  and  The  This  social  decision  philosophies  group  groups  IV.  in  be  place  learning.  rankings  role  to  beliefs  high  the  educational  the  conservative  a  the  have  about  own  of  over  that  distinct  form  those  Factor  liberal  three  the  beliefs  suggested  existed  their  rejecting  of  In  c h i l d r e n may  had  thirty  children  I?  that  approved  ones.  about  education  the  education  beliefs  not  Montessori  cluster  that  amongst  factor.  parents  3  conservative  suggesting  this  c h i l d r e n do  of  suggesting  three  described  and  This  c h i l d r e n must  Traditional  cluster?  or  Besides  that  consisted  favoured  i n education?  &  statements  cluster  that  III  parents.  statements  suggested  suggesting  Iiberal  learning.  religion  which  Factor  over  this  into  those  Traditional  beliefs  coerced  also  guidance.  and  moderate  and  did be fact?  belief one  beliefs  about  their  s a m e mode o f  educating  TABLE 4-5: Rotated_£actor_Ma^ b£;IS„_£_oo_in^  Fac t or  Person  HS 1 HS HS o HS 4 HS 5 HS 6 HS 7 HS 8 HS 9 HS 10 li 1 li 2 o li 4 li ii 5 li 6 ii 7 li 8 ii 9 ii 10 T 1 2 T 3 T 4 T T 5 6 T 7 T 8 T 9 T T 10  Note.. Note!"  Fl  F2  .79634* .73681 .79393* .20104 .00140 .06701 .78141 .02631 .73301 . 277E30 .75072* .55303 .76447* .73418 --. 1 1 0 8 0 .48586 .64519 .69515 .31082 .24522 .45003 .20140 .29351 .31785 .14006 .17434 .06900 .66548* .47809 • 37716  .12147 .23876 .07820 .84688* .75723 .77447* .18641 .69783 .05435 .67789 .10630 .05003 .08336 .15349 .01224 .11508 .16891 -.02279 .06378 .35594 .13975 .11022 .11308 .01545 «381S3 .07372 .07956 -.03306 .10027 .16310  F4  F3  -.09661 .09647 .11905 .12324 a 13731 .24773 .12082 -.17747 .10385 .06351 .20378 .52176 • 28567 .06693 .87372* .46327 .46491 .23942 .56978 .57935 .36973 .67244* .33364 .22957 .02256 .32501 .19370 .42485 .60766* .51483  F5  .09819 -.03870 .00291 -.15950 n 1 . 1&7 -.18591 -.20787 -.16849 --. 1 5 4 8 6 -.40652 -.36144 --. 1 7 0 1 0 -.24866 ~.09256 .13491  "™* n  J~! 1 -.21758 -.24143 -.16741 -.47985 -.46417 -.43791 -.60383 -.67710* -.70034* -.66820 .19439 a  •u-F  XT.f Cj  j-,.  -.26579  .28344 .04499 .09270 -.02273 .20447 -.27983 -.24970 .36620 .25400 -.07948 -.04123 .02150  h  1 ~) \Tj 1 .03508 -.01300 .47603 -.05689 15267 .05908 .13201 .29962 -.07203 .35068 .28834 .11712 -.08083 •-.10871 .08912 -.05250 a ^3038  Highest absolute loading f o reach s o r t e r i n b o l d f a c e type. A s t e r i s k (*> i n d i c a t e s i n d i v i d u a l s c h o s e n f o r i n t e r v i e w .  77  J_-_!_s__*Z__  0.  Fac t or  Bel i e f s 9 M*I II III IV 84  L  I II III IV  8t.§t.em^  z-score  favoured  Belief by  a l l four  clusters:  1.60 1.50 1. 10 1.58  A g o o d way f o r c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i s t o d i s c o v e r knowledge f o r themselves r a t h e r than simply read or hear about i t .  2. 8 4 2. 4 9 1.31 2. 6 9  ' C r e a t i n g l i f e t i m e l e a r n e r s ' i s an important f u n c t i o n o f e d u c a t i o n which can be accomplished by e n c o u r a g i n g c h i l d r e n ' s c r e a t i v i t y and n a t u r a l l o v e o f l e a r n i n g .  Be l__ef s _ l _ v o u r _ e d _ J_Y. _.t hr_ee _ o f _ t h e _ f o u r . _ c i.ust e r s s_ 6  li  II III IV  1.02 2.26 1.26  25  li  I II IV  1.59 1.21 1.45  38  li  II 111 IV  1.02  I II IV  1  Xn 4 ~w/ 2. 9  Beliefs  favoured  / — B  c  Children learn best i n a mainly cooperative environment with competition r e s t r i c t e d t o c o m p e t i t i o n b e t w e e n g r o u p s o f w i t h o n e ' s own past performance. A  good  teacher  loves  learning.  The c u r r i c u l u m must b e f l e x i b l e t o a l l o w t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f new t o p i c s a n d s u b j e c t s f r o m 1.87 t i m e t o t i m e a s w e l 1 a s new i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t si:: i e n c e a n d h i s t o r y . •-••=;  oo  Education should create people knowledge and seek t r u t h .  who  love  1.50 by. t w o o f t h e f o u r  clusters:  1.1. L  I II  1. 19 1. 9 3  A g o o d way f o r c h i l d r e n l i f e experiences rather ones.  li  I II  1.03 1.64  C h i l d r e n l e a r n b e s t i n an a t m o s p h e r e where t h e s t r u c t u r e i s i n t h e background and c h i l d r e n can make s o m e c h o i c e s a b o u t w h a t t h e y a r e g o i n g t o d o a n d how t h e y a r e g o i n g t o d o i t .  14  t o l e a r n i s from ' r e a l than formal educational  78  27  M  I IV  1 .49 1 o 20  A good t e a c h e r d o e s n ' t a c t u a l l y t e a c h - she/he a c t s as a c a t a l y s t and a r e s o u r c e person.  28  L  II III  1 1 . 00  A good  80  M  I IV  1 .54 1 .07  T h e b e s t way f o r e d u c a t i o n t o e n h a n c e a c h i l d ' s s e l f - e s t e e m i s by r e s p e c t i n g h i s f e e l i n g s and a c c e p t i n g h i m t h e way h e i s .  §*^ieiii_„_JVOured_b__ Factor  teacher  loves  children  o n e _ c j _ u s t e r _onl y :  I  56  M  1.39  Education should encourage c h i l d r e n t o set t h e i r own g o a l s a n d s t a n d a r d s a n d t r y t o meet them w i t h o u t c o m p a r i s o n t o o t h e r s .  81  l_  1.37  E d u c a t i o n e n h a n c e s a c h i l d ' s s e l f - e s t e e m when t h e c h i l d g u i d e s h i s own e d u c a t i o n a n d f o l l o w s h i s own i n t e r e s t s a n d n e e d s .  60  L  1.32  Education should encourage c h i l d r e n a n d c l a r i f y t h e i r own v a l u e s .  5  L  1.31  C h i l d r e n l e a r n b e s t i n an atmosphere o f c o o p e r a t i o n where c o m p e t i t i o n i s a v o i d e d .  54  L  1.23  A l l c h i l d r e n a r e n a t u r a l l y c r e a t i v e and t h e r o l e o f a g o o d e d u c a t i o n i s t o make s u r e t h i s n a t u r a l c r e a t i v i t y i s n o t d e s t r o y e d by restrictive practices.  7E/ M  1.07  Education  22  C  1.07  A good t e a c h e r behavi our.  74  C  1.04  Education should create people moral standards.  1.66  E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d f o c u s on a v a r i e t y o f s k i l l s v o c a t i o n a l ? academic? l e i s u r e a c t i v i t i e s and l i f e s t y l e i s s u e s (sex education? drug and a l c o h o l abuse e d u c a t i o n e t c . )  Fac t or  to create  11 should  c r e a t e good  citizens  i s an e x a m p l e  o f moral  who  have  high  Factor III 49  M  -  79  79  C  1.50  E d u c a t i o n c a n e n h a n c e a c h i l d s e I f - e s t e e m by s e t t i n g high standards for academic accomplishment a n d b e h a v i o u r a n d e n c o u r a g i n g c h i l d r e n t o meet t h e m t h r o u g h h a r d w o r k a n d self~discipline.  17  M  1.48  C h i l d r e n l o v e t o l e a r n what i s e a s y and p l e a s a n t f o r them, b u t u n f o r t u n a t e l y s o m e t i m e s have t o be f o r c e d t o s t u d y t h o s e a r e a s which a r e more d i f f i c u l t and l e s s p l e a s a n t .  23  C  1.25  To be a g o o d t e a c h e r , one must be and i n t e l l i g e n t i n many a r e a s .  41  li  1.05  A l l c h i l d r e n need t o l e a r n c e r t a i n b a s i c s u b j e c t s , but a f t e r t h a t t h e y s h o u l d follow t h e i r own i n t e r e s t s and talents.  1.12  Education s o c i e t y.  Factor 78  weI I  educated  IV  L  fcNotei CO b e I i e f.  Conservative  should  belief,  create people  CM)  Moderate  who  belief,  will  CL)  improve  Liberal  80  I_^_i____Zi  Q  Fac t o r  _„.§j?.emerits_p^  z - s c or e  B._Ii_._s_r._Jl_£_____  Be I i <& f  l_yr.__ll__.t_E._l  N'-' e n  & ^__\£ _ _ _ _ _ _ „ _ _ _ _ . . _ ^ e  15  L* II III IV  -1.49 C h i l d r e n l e a r n b e s t i n an atmosphere o f -1.97 freedom, f r e e o f e x t e r n a l l y imposed s t r u c t u r e s -1.07 r u l e s and e x p e c t a t i o n s .  16  C  I II III  -1.56 Most -1.38 t i m e -1.06 l e f t  31  C  I III IV  - 2 . 9 7 What s h o u l d b e t a u g h t s h o u l d b e d e c i d e d b y -3.21 r e f e r e n c e t o t h e B i b l e o r B i b l i c a l standards. -3.22  32 C  I III IV  - 1 . 2 0 What s h o u l d b e t a u g h t s h o u l d b e d e c i d e d b y -1.44 r e f e r r i n g t o what h a s t r a d i t i o n a l l y b e e n -1.44 t a u g h t .  40  C  I II IV  c h i l d r e n would p r o b a b l y spend a l l o f t h e i r p l a y i n g and l e a r n l i t t l e i f t h e y were t o t h e i r own d e v i c e s .  -1.59 A l l c h i l d r e n s h o u l d be t a u g h t -1.24 t h r o u g h o u t their education. -1.02  t h e same  need  i s nothing  a l l children  to  subjects  42 L  I Ill IV  -1.69 There -2.94 -1.37  learn.  57  L  II III IV  -1.28 E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d not i n f l i c t arbitrary -1.85 s t a n d a r d s upon t h e c h i l d - t h e c h i l d s h o u l d - 1 . 2 2 d e c i d e how i m p o r t a n t t h e t a s k i s a n d t h e amount o f e f f o r t he o r s h e w i s h e d t o e x p e n d on i t.  58  C  I III IV  -2.10 E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d e n c o u r a g e c h i l d r e n t o c o n f o r m -2.94 t o t r a d i t i o n a l J u d e o - C h r i s t i a n v a l u e s . -2.81  59  M  I III IV  -1.66 E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d e n c o u r a g e c h i l d r e n t o a c c e p t -1.30 and c o n f o r m t o t h e v a l u e s o f t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r - 1 . 9 1 r e I i g i o u s o r e t hn i c c ommun i t y .  81  1  M  I II  37  C  III IV  55  C  82  C  Fac t or  -1.01 -1.57  T h e b e s t way f o r c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i s from an a d u l t l e a d e r w i t h a g r o u p o f c h i l d r e n the same a g e .  -1.06 •-1. 04  A l t h o u g h t h e c u r r i c u l u m h a s t o be a d j u s t e d t o i n c l u d e s c i e n t i f i c d i s c o v e r i e s a n d r ec e n t historical e v e n t s , t h e t o p i c s c o v e r e d and the s u b j e c t s i n c l u d e d can remain b a s i c a l l y unchanged from g e n e r a t i o n t o g e n e r a t i o n .  I IV  -1.23 -1.46  Education should encourage c h i l d r e n to s t r i v e f o r e x c e l l e n c e and a c h i e v e m e n t o f g o a l s s e t by t e a c h e r s / t u t o r s , p a r e n t s , or o t h e r author— a t a t i v e b o d i e s , <!eg. u n i v e r s i t i e s , a w a r d granting groups, etc.)  I II  -1.60 -1.57  The goal o f " c r e a t i n g l i f e t i m e l e a r n e r s ' perhaps admirable i s not a p r a c t i c a l one d e t r a c t s from more a t t a i n a b l e g o a l s .  while and  I  83  li  -1.44  Goals such as ' c r e a t i n g l i f e t i m e l e a r n e r s ' can b e s t be a c c o m p l i s h e d by e x p o s i n g c h i l d r e n t o a r i g o r o u s academic c u r r i c u l u m which g i v e s them k n o w l e d g e and i n f o r m a t i o n t o p u r s u e f u r t h e r e d u c a t i o n i f a n d when t h e y w a n t t o .  8  C  -1.35  A g o o d way for c h i l d r e n to learn and m e m o r i z i n g i n f o r m a t i o n u n t i l recall i t instantly.  64  C  -1.08  Education tradition  67  C  -1.03  T e s t s may be u n p o p u l a r but t h e y a r e a good t o m e a s u r e how well a c h i l d ' s education i s p r o g r e s s i ng.  -2.49  Education should encourage c h i l d r e n a n d c l a r i f y t h e i r own values.  -2.20  T h e b e s t way for c h i l d r e n other chiIdren.  Factor 60  L  should teach children and a u t h o r i t y .  i s by d r i l l i n g they can  respect  for  way  II  to  learn  to  is  create  from  82 &5  19  -1.72  M  C  -1.57  Education should teach v a I u e s o f s o c i e t y.  children  to  question  Most c h i l d r e n a r e r e a d y t o b e g i n formal e d u c a t i o n b e f o r e t h e y a r e s i x and s h o u l d a I I owed t o d o s o .  be  39  L  -1.23  The c u r r i c u l u m must be c o n s t a n t l y c h a n g i n g r e f I e c t what i s c u r r e n t i n o u r s o c i e t y .  50  L  -1.18  Education recognise  26  M  -1.16  To be a g o o d t e a c h e r ? one must h a v e s p e c i a l i z e d t r a i n i n g i n t e a c h i n g methods'.  33  M  -1.16  What s h o u l d b e t a u g h t s h o u l d experts i n c h i l d development  20  M  -1.04  The t r a d i t i o n a l age o f s i x i s a good age s t a r t formal e d u c a t i o n because i t i s the most c h i l d r e n a r e r e a d y f o r i t .  What s h o u l d b e t a u g h t s h o u l d the c h i l d wants t o learn.  Factor  should teach children their feelings.  the  to  to  be d e c i d e d by and education. to age  III  5  L  -1.50  30  L  -1.31  44  M  -1.08 Education should let children discover t h e y a r e n a t u r a l l y good at? r a t h e r than f o r c e t h e m t o d o what t h e y d i s l i k e o r f i n d difficult.  45  L  -1.03 No m a t t e r how h a r d y o u t r y ? y o u c a n n o t t e a c h a c h i l d something i f t h e c h i l d does not f i n d i t interesting? e n j o y a b l e o r r e l e v a n t i n some manner.  Factor 21  A good t e a c h e r l e t s the c h i l d wants t o learn.  child  be  decided  select  by  what  what  the  what  IV  L.  *N£_e_ CO B e l i e f.  -1.48  Most c h i l d r e n a r e not r e a d y t o b e g i n formal e d u c a t i o n u n t i l welI a f t e r age s i x and s h o u l d not be pushed i n t o formal education u n t i l they are ready.  Conservative  Belief?  CM)  Moderate  Belief?  CD  Liberal  83 The in  responses relation  the  examined three did  the  statements  in  light  not  and  form  factor  I I I and  unique  found.  order  predominately  factor  rather to  that  The  It appears  beliefs.  Factor  liberal created  loaded  on  significance this  I,  or  IV  Factor  significantly the  including IV  at  groups  may  greater  and  the  higher  a  or  hand,  Factor of  only  .5.  factor  liberal  IV  The array of  do  the  than  was and  on  the  the and  conservative Moderate  (alt.)  those  were  4-9  liberal  favours  IV.  conducted  lower  they  factor  ANOVA's  of  than  than  two  set  more  examination  favour  one  and  positions  and  favour  Q-sorts  within  ( j _ ~ . 0511)  cluster  ranked  I  factor  4-8  IV  c o n s e r v a t i v e ones.  by  in Table  factor  across  on  these  I and  other  factor  means were  displayed  on  positions  conservative the  The  traditional,  clustered  philosophical  or of  and  on  in  be  resulted.  distributed  of  posited  then  predominately  significantly  that  which  any  interpreted  philosophical  can  Montessori  whether  I I I and  I I I , on  Factor  philosophical  that  three  moderate  results  beliefs  beliefs  array  than  liberal  were  be  three  clustered  loaded  ascertain  Factor  pragmatic  over  parents  they  the  clusters  parents  must  implicitly  Homeschoolers  m u l t i p l e comparison  philosophical others.  clusters.  liberal,  arrays.  indicate  parent  and  homeschooler,  although  four  subsequent  the  traditional  IV,  Q-sort  viewpoints  moderate  II, Montessori  Similarly, In  of  the  V a r i a t i o n s from  groups,  I I I and  on  philosophical  conservative,  decision  factor I,  to  the  structured Q-sort.  positions,  I  to  is a  persons  ANOVA  of  beliefs  the  factor who three  approaches results  philosophy.  suggests Factor  II  84 does  not appear  because using  they  high  individuals  internal  from  either  or because  they a r e  t h e one p o s i t e d  The homogenaeity  loadings, high  loaned  philosophy  a t random  structure  who p a r t i c i p a t e d  the support  by t h e  of the factor, the  sort-resort  correlation  i n interview portion  by t h e i n t e r v i e w s s u g g e s t s  o f t h e two  of t h e study that  the latter  t h e case.  The  second  ANOVA  philosophy 4—11  indicate  factor they  each  s e t o f 28 i t e m s  the different  the results  o f means.  belief  of this  gave  t o each Factor  removed.  s e t of items.  IV w i t h  T h i s ANOVA  significantly statements.  suggested  i n t h e how Factor  liberal  items  items  Table  and subsequent was w h e t h e r  different Again,  multiple  the different rankings  IV ( a l t . )  who h a d m i x e d  Factors  was t h e loadings  I and II d i f f e r e d  ranked  conservative  I I was s i g n i f i c a n t l y  higher  than  difference  i n the rankings  on t h e f i v e  factor  arrays.  significantly  higher  than  a  4-10 a n d  i n t h e mean  Factor  individuals that  comprised  favourably they  was n o s i g n i f i c a n t  pragmatic  those  now  which  clusters.  ANOVA  The q u e s t i o n  a r r a y s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y  modified  There  compared  across  comparison  IV.  any p a r t i c u l a r  sorted the cards  of the Q-sort.  relatively  is  have  a different  structure  and  t o favour  Factor  d i d factors  factor  I.  given I,  ranked  II,  III  and  85 T A B L E 4-8:  Anaiysis„.of„yari.ance_of  IV_and_IV_ait.2  Sour ce o f V a r i a t i on  E_____.__ B e t ween Groups  Wi t h i n Groups  _actor_III Between Groups  Between Groups Within Groups  Within Groups Note,,.  24.0357  2. 184C  2  3.2262  225.3571  81  2.7945  31.4524  2  15.7262  205.5357  81  2.5375  23.5238  2  11.7619  119.4286  81  2.4621  E____L___._I_L*_ Between Groups  Mean Squares  81  6.4524  Within Groups  df  48.0741  176.9286  Factor Between Groups  Within Groups  Sum o f Squares  15.6429  2  205.2500  81  *fi< . 0 5 .  * * f i < . 01  7.8214  F Rat i o  11.0038  Prob,  .0001**  1.1545  .3204  6.1976  .0031**  4.7772  .0109*  3.0867  .0511  86 TABLE  4-9;  Results_o_f_Stud  i£_jD_2____,____i^ _-.L_._2  Group  Conservative  Moderate  Liberal  5_Z§_Z  ______  Factor  I  4.4643  Conservative  Moderate  Liberal  __Q1Z_  ______  __Zi57  II  Conservative  III  4 ..9286  Conservative  IV  4.7857  Conservative  IV  (alt)  Note. Means which under I i n i n g .  5.1071  Liberal  5 -.2500  Moderate  Moderate  6.3571  Liberal  5..7857_._  Moderate  5.2132  Liberal  6.0714  a r e not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t  are joined  by  87  TABLE  4-10:  Source of Var i a t i on  Sum o f Squar e s  Conservative Between 27.8143 Groups Within Groups  ______£_. Between Groups Wi t h i n Groups L i _ b e r a l_ B e t ween Groups Wi t h i n Groups.  __D__§£er.._5_._iY*Ll._._„£b  m  A n a l y s j l s_o_f_yar  320.3214  11.6379  354.6478  ^4.2571  337.7143  df  Mean Squar e s  F Rat i o  Pr ob. o f F Rat i o  4  £..'3536  2.9306  0232*  135  2.3728  4  2.9095  1.1364  421  135  2.5604  4  8.5643  3.4235  0106*  135  2.5016  88  Tab I e 4 - 1 1 :  Results_of_Student_  M „ l _ „ _ _ £ _ _ _ i „ _ _ _ „ _ m „ - ^ ^ liy__I_£tor_____ys_IFactor  Phi IosophicaI Or i e n t a t i o n  Factor  IVCalt)  IV  III  II  I  IV  IVCalt)  5„7§57  __QQQO  6.0690  II  IV  5_0357  5_2143  C o n s e r v a t i v<  II Mod e r a t e  ..... 5 . 4 5 4 3  _  III .i b e r a I  8929  III __3214  IVCalt) ______ 6.2500  Note.. Means under I i n i ng.  which  a r e not  significantly  different  are joined  by  __QVA._of_Ran_ings._Gw In  order  to differentiate  philosophical decision  clusters  groups  an  which  and  alternate  which  beliefs  separated  beliefs  a p p r o a c h ' was  separated taken  the the  which  different different i s diverges  from  Q-methodology.  analyze  which  decision  This  items  groups  was  or  the  at  g=.01  level  were  the  SPSS—X  4-13.  significant decision Table  4-12  groups  4-13  lists  the  those  by  the  of  can  between  wher e  f or  between forming  means each  utilized 4-12  t he*r e  three  and  the  the  between  d i f f er enc e s  which  the  which of  the  wh i c h  Montessori  three  mean  in Tables  between  for  The  the  Student-Neuman-Keuls  seen  s t a t ement s  statements  parents  the  variance?  be  in rankings  differences  to  asc er t a i n  analysis  (homeschoolers?  lists  ranked  to  program?  differences  significant as  this  'Breakdown'  Tab I e  subjected  p r oc e d u r e  of  and  differentiated  groups  results  differentiate  data  significantly  which  The  raw  groups.  items  lay.  the  philosophical  those  c ompar i s o n  to  four  of  11 i p I e  return  significantly  scores  ITIU  to  wer e parent  traditional).  there  were  raw  scores  four  and  for  items  philosophical  cIusters.  Differences indicate  what  schoolers? those  who  or  procedure  compatriots differed on  Factor  those  the  who  regular  chose  public  philosophical  i l luminate  which  on  I?  from  those  on  Factor  I I I we*re d i s s i m i l a r  alternate  education  school  system.  created  differed  traditional IV  and  from  groups  from  how  those  parents the on  non-  the the*  from  could  from  The  by  features divided  homeschooIers how  decision  schoolers  groups  Christian Factor  three  differentiate  parents  the  i n the  would  how  between  attitudes  prefer  differences  groups?  i n response  factoring decision  their on  Factor  Montessori Factor  I.  III  parents Similarly?  this  t wo-pronged  congruent in  the  with  system.  homeschooIers and  the  educat e  best t h e ir  approac.h  helps  deschooling The  Factor  share  many  ways  to  and  which  beliefs but  which  can  I liontessor i  learn?  c h i Id r e n .  discern  about  be  held  parents the  tael  iefs  may  while  and  the  be  remaining Factor  nature  of  the  child  ultimately differ  in  how  to  I  91  9._2y„._.s. r.i -1 -> ' (  1. T h e b e s t way f o r c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i s f r o m a n a d u l t w i t h a g r o u p o f c h i l d r e n t h e same a g e . Tr ad. Mont e s s e r i HS —_ ™™ik 3.6  leader  3. T h e b e s t way f o r c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i s i n a o n e - t o - o n e s i t u a t i o n from a p a r e n t o r t u t o r . HS Trad Montessori 7.4 5.5 5.3  11. A g o o d way f o r c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i s f r o m ' r e a l life' e x p e r i e n c e s r a t h e r than formal e d u c a t i o n a l ones. HS Trad Montessori 7„8 5_8 5_B 19 are  Most six  c h i l d r e n a r e ready t o b e g i n formal and s h o u l d be a l l o w e d t o do s o . Montessori Trad 6...0 5_2  21. Most c h i l d r e n a r e n o t r e a d y t o b e g i n and s h o u l d not be pushed i n t o formal r eady. HS Montessori G.l 3.9  2 3 . T o b e a g o o d t e a c h e r o n e must educated i n many a r e a s . Montessori Trad 6_4 5_5  education  before  they  HS 3. 9  u n t i l well a f t e r age s i x education u n t i l they a r e Trad 3.9  be i n t e l I i g e n t  and be  well  HS 4._6  26. T o b e a g o o d t e a c h e r , t e a c h i n g methods. Trad 6.1  o n e must  have  Montessori 5.8  specialized HS 3.7  training in  3 3 . What s h o u l d b e t a u g h t s h o u l d b e d e c i d e d development and e d u c a t i o n . Montessori Trad 5.8 5.3  by e x p e r t s  3 5 . What t o know.  b y what  should  be taught  should  HS 5_9  .  be d e c i d e d  in child  HS 4.1  Montessori 5. 1  a child  wants  Trad 4,„4  39. T h e c u r r i c u l u m must b e c o n s t a n t l y c h a n g i n g t o r e f l e c t c u r r e n t i n our s o c i e t y . Trad Montessori HS 6_.,5 6_JL 4.6 42.  There  i s nothing HS 4„0  that  alI children Montessori 4_._0  need  what i s  t o know. Trad 2. 5  49. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d f o c u s on a v a r i e t y o f s k i l l s - v o c a t i o n a l ? academic? l e i s u r e a c t i v i t i e s and l i f e s t y l e i s s u e s (sex education? drug and a l c o h o l abuse e d u c a t i o n e t c . ) Tr ad Mon t e s s o r i HS  58. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d e n c o u r a g e J u d e o — C h r i s t i an v a I u e s . HS 4_7  children  t o conform  Trad 4_._0  to  traditional  Montessori 2. 2  72.A c a r e e r o r a j o b ? i s t h e b e s t e d u c a t i o n . Students learn from w o r k i n g i n t h e r e a l w o r l d t h a n t h e y do from formal educat i on. HS Trad Montessori 6.0 4.8 4.5  81. Education g u i d e s h i s own  Note.  e n h a n c e s a c h i l d ' s s e l f - e s t e e m when e d u c a t i o n a n d f o l l o w s h i s own n e e d s HS Mont Trad ' 6.7 6.7 4.8  HS=Homeschoo I e r s ?  Means j o i n e d  Mont=Montessori?  by u n d e r l i n i n g  more  the child and i n t e r e s t s .  Trad=Traditional  not s i g n i f i c a n t l y  different  at  _<»05.  I«_L___:_ri._l^ groups..  1. The* b e s t way f o r c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i s f r o m w i t h a g r o u p o f c h i l d r e n t h e same a g e . Ill IV I 5 b_33  2.  The best  way I  __ 5  leader II  3 «__3£$  for children to learn III  5„ZZ_._._  an a d u l t  i s from IV  __§Z  other  children. II  4__ 5 _____  ~_  3. T h e b e s t way f o r c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i s i n a o n e - t o - o n e s i t u a t i o n from a p a r e n t or s i m i l a r a d u l t tutor. II I IV III 8. 0 5_.84 5^83 6. C h i l d r e n learn best i n a mainly c o o p e r a t i v e environment with c o m p e t i t i o n r e s t r i c t e d t o c o m p e t i t i o n between groups or with o n e ' s own p a s t p e r f o r m a n c e . III II I IV 8. 5 §__.§ 6__2 5..3 9. A g o o d way f o r c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i s t o d i s c o v e r knowledge f o r t h e m s e l v e s r a t h e r than imply read or hear about i t . I II III IV 7._5 Z_„ 6 5._5 11. A g o o d way f o r c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i s f r o m ' r e a l e x p e r i e n c e s r a t h e r than formal e d u c a t i o n a l ones. II I III 8__.0 & _ • _ _ _ _ 5 __.__> 15. C h i l d r e n learn e x t e r n a l l y imposed I e =; i "=: v.j. \. %j  life' IV __.__3  b e s t i n an a t m o s p h e r e o f freedom, f r e e o f s t r u c t u r e s , r u l e s and expectations. II III IV  o ^_«_t_ p  o v__v«___ «=• o I _______'_™™  17. Children l o v e t o l e a r n what i s e a s y a n d p l e a s a n t f o r them but, u n f o r t u n a t e l y sometimes have t o be f o r c e d t o s t u d y t h o s e a r e a s w h i c h a r e most d i f f i c u l t o r l e s s pleasant. Ill II IV I 7. 17 5.8 5.6 4.JB 30. A good I earn.  teacher  I 5.77  lets  the child II 4.8  select  what IV 4.66  the child  wants t o III 3.83  94 3 1 . What s h o u l d b e t a u g h t s h o u l d B i b l e or B i b l i c a l standards. II IV 6.8 3.0  be d e c i d e d  3 5 . What s h o u l d wants t o l e a r n . I 5^8  be d e c i d e d  be taught  should  by r e f e r e n c e  to the  III „._§_?  II 5.6  b y what  I  the child  III 4.3  IV 4.0  3 6 . What s h o u l d b e t a u g h t s h o u l d b e d e c i d e d b y t h e p e r s o n r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t e a c h i n g t h e c h i l d — h i s t e a c h e r , t u t o r or parent. II I III IV 5_§ 5^,2 4_5 4_17 38. T h e c u r r i c u l u m must b e f l e x i b l e t o a l l o w t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f new t o p i c s a n d s u b j e c t s f r o m t i m e t o t i m e a s w e l I a s new i n f o r m a t i o n about science* and h i s t o r y . III IV II I 8.17 6_83 _ _ _ _6._§0___ 6_„38 39 The* c u r r i c u l u m m u s t c u r r e n t i n our s o c i e t y . IV 6„5 42.  There  i s nothing I 4.38  c o n s t a n t l y be c h a n g i n g III 6. 5  that  t o refle*ct  what i s  I 5_69  a l l children II 3_4_  need  II 4. 0  to learn. III 3.17  IV 2. 0  44. Education should l e t n a t u r a l l y good a t , r a t h e r or f i n d difficult. I 6„46  c h i l d r e n d i s c o v e r what t h e y a r e t h a n f o r c e t h e m t o d o what t h e y II 5_8  IV 4.83  dislike III 4_66  49. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d f o c u s on a v a r i e t y o f s k i l l s — v o c a t i o n a l , academic, l e i s u r e a c t i v i t i e s and l i f e s t y l e i s s u e s ( s e x e d u c a t i o n , drug and a l c o h o l abuse.) Ill IV I II 7.83 7.5 6.61 4.6  50.  Education IV 7.0  should  teach  children  I 6.69  to recognise their III 6.17  feelings. II 3.8  35 51. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d t e a c h c h i l d r e n themselves as they are. IV I 7. 6 6 6_ 15  t o be happy  and  accept  III 6_0  II 5_._6  57. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d n o t i n f l i c t a r b i t r a r y s t a n d a r d s c h i l d - t h e c h i l d s h o u l d d e c i d e how i m p o r t a n t a t a s k amount o f e f f o r t h e o r s h e w i s h e s t o s p e n d on i t . I IV II 5.46 4_17 3_8 58. Education should Christian values. II 6.6  60. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d t h e i r own v a l u e s . I 7_07  encourage  children  IV 5.0  encourage  children  66. and  76.  should  II  children  7„2  good  III 2-0  and  clarify II 2.14  to set their III i ~  respect  own II  5  -  f o r a u t h o r i t y and  III 6_3  create  t o Judeo-  III 6_. 16  IV 5_8  Education should teach children g i v e them t h e t o o l s t o f i x i t . IV I 7.17 5_15 Education  to create  IV 6_._83  teach  III 3„17  I 2.61  62. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d e n c o u r a g e c h i l d r e n s t a n d a r d s o f n e a t n e s s and o r g a n i z a t i o n . IV l " 5_8 5_Z_ 64. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d t r a d i ti on. II 6„4  t o conform  upon t h e i s and t h e  what  i s wrong  I 4.2 with  II 4_6  society III 4_3  citizens.  IV'  III  Z_iZ_  I  §_2  §_§  8 1 . E d u c a t i o n e n h a n c e s a c h i l d ' s s e l f - - e s t e e m when t h e c h i l d g u i d e s h i s own e d u c a t i o n a n d f o l l o w s h i s own n e e d s a n d i n t e r e s t s . I II III IV 7.23 _ &_Q0 5_17 4..5 i2_e." F a c t o r n=6. Means j o i n e d N  I , n = 13:  Factor  II? n 5 ; =  Factor  by u n d e r l i n i n g n o t s i g n i f i c a n t l y  I I I , n=6, different  Factor  IV,  a t _<.05.  96 Eleven the  of the twelve  cards.  subject two  from  her  factor  parents  and  correlations correlation  were was  from  gave  reliability  for the  primary  experiences parent, or  level  topics.  The  public  school  and  type  location  out a  have  topic  attempted  i n f o r mat i o n  school  about  whether  system  that  the second,  two  of  lowest The  of  mean  16.789 w h i c h i s  substantial  test-retest  prompted  her experiences  topic,  covered  affect  how  anything  about  her d e c i s i o n  Montessori  of peers feelings  the parent after  the child  a n d how  as  instances  her d e c i s i o n .  o r educ a t i on  as a  i s s u e s such  and her  intently  own  the  her awareness  experiences,  d i d indeed  was  covered  the parent's  any s i g n i f i c a n t  c h i I d - r ear i n g  there  was  The* f i r s t  her d e c i s i o n ,  t o probe  protocols)  as a homeschooling,  experiences  educational  her experiences  parent,  The  t h e deck  Z-transformation.  of these  of education,  affected  had a l t e r n a t e  second  were s e l e c t e d ,  IV p a r e n t s .  f o r sample  parent.  the  whether  another  to resort  t o .88.  indicating  her e x p e r i e n c e s  educational  had  by  individuals  t value  IV  as a s c h o o l g i r l ,  own  may  .56  first  interviewees  which  replaced  resorted  Q-sort.  (see Appendix  the third,  regular  interviewed  Bi^yiik^Qi-.^.h^—lD.^i^LYk^^  interviews  three  from  a critical  a t t h e .0005  The  more  at v i a F i s h e r  significant  _i*i__§_ydy.L  was  t h e two F a c t o r  arrived  t-test  three  were  and one h o m e s c h o o l e r  C o r r e l a t i o n s ranged  A one-way  who  The t w e l f t h i n d i v i d u a l  Montessori  cards.  individuals  that  who as t o  The sought s h e b e e ame  or t h e  local  decision  97 was  reached.  The  final  parents  section  of  qualities  or a c h i l d  how h a p p y  they  circumstances  were  also  asked  and  asked  how  whether  they  they  they  felt  felt  i t would  the time  of topics  would  felt  affect  information  had been  parents  decision  limited  how  information.  representative of their  their  group  thus  views  different i n any They  primary  program  i n any manner.  t h e most  released,  made a  choice.  interference etc.).  decision  form  and whether  was j e o p a r d i z e d  t h e new p r o p o s e d  their  i n that  choice  parents  choice  government  choice?  make a d i f f e r e n t  other  their  about  their  to the  chosen.  t o engage  of the interviews, only  on  crisis?  relating  system  needed  were w i t h  why t h e y  (by lack o f funding,  were  range  to a  a s t o b e n e f i t s and problems o f t h e i r  a parent  and whether  i t a reaction  the educational  what  choice way  with  o r was  a wide  under  They  At  inquired  education,  and  covers  experiences  Questions what  Did i t evolve  preliminary were  making  The f i n a l  question  they  the factor  felt  their  asked  them  array for  was.  A >_ _ T h e ...Parent __s J E x p e r i e n c e _.a s _,a _.S t u d e n t The  parents  most  being  attended  ranged  i n the late  school  of  the twelve  in  Ontario,  were  were  their  30s t o e a r l y  between  late  educated  and England.  one each  educated  in a truly  environment,  the* r e s t  i n urban,  rural  40s with most  1970s. being  Two  educated  traditional  'one-or-two-room  smal I town  Nine  Two o f t h e f o u r  'out o f p r o v i n c e ' .  were  Thus,  and t h e e a r l y  i n B.C., w i t h  States  20s t o t h e i r  40s range.  t h e mid-1950s  educated  the United  homeschoolers parents  i n age from  or suburban  school' schools.  Three  of the parents  schools, been one  although  very  brief.  quality  had  graduated  at  The r e m a i n i n g  I east  from  grade  degree,  another  remaining  homeschooler  training.  The t h r e e  12.  They  after  were  having  course  after  ECE degree,  was  going  an  undergraduate  Montessori  secondary  business  who  was w e l l - e d u c a t e d .  better  education  than  had, u n l i k e other children.  A l l parents  homeschooIers had one h a v i n g degree.  The  grade  t o school  a career-oriented training  training  university  on t o t a k e  and  degree,  part-time  traditional  as  parents  had  post-  In g e n e r a l ,  had i n i t i a l l y  two g r o u p s ,  a  vocational  a education  training.  parents,  highly of  her Montessori  A l l five  HomeschooIers  the other  spoke  her Montessori  attending  I parents,  had a l l completed  and t a k e  had  i n that  arts  had taken  t o take  had taken  or v o c a t i o n a l  experiences  a l l had r e t u r n e d  12 a n d t w o h a d c o n t i n u e d  sample  had  parents  One,  i n psychology.  grade  education,  post-secondary  i n that  currently  who  Iiberal  i n Catholic  Factor  of t h e four  four-year  12, r e t u r n e d  was  completed  having  Three  h a d some  a second  parent  time  of expectations.  to return to University  the third  parents  a  both  was u n h a p p y  or col lege  had c h i l d r e n . grade  who  level  12.  interesting  and  while  and  some u n i v e r s i t y  teaching  two were  a Montessori  of teaching  f o r some  homeschooler's  homeschooler,  the other  the  educated  the Christian  a non-aligned  environment,  had been  this had a  but t h e Montessori  a l lreturned  t o school  after  99  Although school  three  of  the  experiences,  school.  homeschooling  one  HomeschooIers  genuinely  Christian views  embittered.  The  three  a l l felt  their  salubrious  and  variously  parents -one  good  school and  felt  teacher".  peers.  found  injustices unusually ungraded pace*.  to  i n the  She  parent  to  noted  that  competent  loved  school.  her  grades  i n her  student  confidence education  that  she  that  parents  was  were  loving  she  was  students not of  the  were  was  life,  very  good  also  she  the  'smart'.  they had  as  post-secondary  and disliking to  be  and  felt  good  The  noted but  her  and that  stil I  education  own  this  One  became as  a  more  high  lacked  continued  learning.  an  remaining  students.  older  an  in  being  A l l have  enjoy  she  as  grew  grades  three  hand-picked  classroom.  other  and  at  A l l were r e a s o n a b l y dropping  teachers  that  noted  problems  'em  her  proceed  behaviour the  with  the*  noted  these  count  her  power  also  to  of  -  opportunity  free  Two  learning  None o f  parent  been  "one  school,  of  not  unhappy  one  to  were  had  enjoyed  abuses  loving  disapproving  was  less  although  Another but  they  of  rejected.  difficult.  felt  ambience  got  she  or  fourth enjoyed  and  social  suggesting  traditional  the  mildly  experience  school  i n which  general  interested school  teacher,  the  mentioned  she  system.  classroom  intellectually added  disliked  spoke  experiences  parent  inordinately  what  strict  good  noted  n e g a t i v e l y of  whose e x p e r i e n c e s  isolated  the  four  from  group  third  while  parents  sensitive  only  The  All  school  Montessori was  their  experiences  her  none  that  peer  spoke  homeschooler  ranged  unpleasant  felt  parents  their  Fewer  of  and  none  the  oo  i mentioned  having  education. interest cluster  Both  fact,  i s that  interest  In  not  to  noted  that  planned  of  to  their  and  said  four  One  was  five  parent  was  ungraded,  individualised  who  extremely  described  courses. at  her  positive  experiences  her  decision  to  traditional  choose  parents,  experiences  wanted The  convinced  had  as  her  extremely  I I I and  them  that  one  or  in  a  own decisions based  on  i n the  other,  were  definite  to  deschool»  The  ungraded to  attend  an  traditional happy  school  neighbourhood  a  parents,  their  children I  and  taken  Two  i n an  cluster  had  child.  worked  religion,  decision  she  a  their  affect  neighbourhood  cluster  as  fifth  an  student  homeschoolers  their  regular  a  either  whose e x p e r i e n c e  i n her  said  d e c i s i o n s were  case  childhood  on  was  the  telling  alluded to  enjoyed  not  the  student,  but  university.  who  did  program.  the  one  a  lost of  good  second  she  The  Their  positive  her  a  I parents  shaped  they  p l a y i n g school  non-aligned  had  III Montessori  their  cluster  c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , i n one  experiences  a  formal  One  unexpected,  when  loved  position  Both  was  teacher,  experiences  classroom  felt  a  their  years.  homeschooIers  one* h o m e s c h o o l e r  their  of  indicated  she  An  school'  always  end  school  felt  children's education.  their  parent,  high  the  the  parents  way.  education  development.  cluster  the  'free  she'd  take  Montessori  child  of  the  IV  either  in a  after  students  non-academic  theoretical  that  three  four  schooling, for  during  comment  teach  responsible one  cluster  in teaching.  fact,  had  courses  III traditional  did  third  the  i n school  other  planned  taken  also  had  affected  program. on  children  felt  cluster needed  Two IV  101 structure program  and  over  beneficial IV  parent  B)  thereby  Montessori.  feature of felt  her  parents  they  had  were  small.  she  was  she  took  parent  read  except  cluster  schooling  One  the  had  at  the  commented  on  writing  a  choose  the  III parent  i n England  been  lacking  of  p a r en t .  The  bias?  non-aligned  writings  of  read  Montessori nothing  traditional  felt  this  while  the  was  a  cluster  structure.  parent,  Montessori because  his  Holt. education  felt  father  disabilities.  a l l read  about  The  She  after  their  he*r was  two  the  too was  AI I  III  and  guided parent  at  Traditional  risk  their  aut h o r s the*  began that  with  like*,  program  the  parents attending was  choice.  considered  for  a  while  about  there  their  distractible  as  Montessori  enthusiasm  said  I  four  before  read  children  which  although  cluster  I Montessori  one* p a r e n t  dyslexic,  chose  expressed  -  that  questionnaire  one.  Moore  children  books  the  to  indicated  commented  education  t e n d ed  the*ir  was  the  the* c l u s t e r  I Traditional child  their  on  cluster  child  when  Another  each  Raymond  both  Al I but  the* c l u s t e r  but  salt.  of  Dob s o n ,  parents  parent  listed  did  IV  alI  critique*  age* a s  James  about  of  homesc h o o I e r s  preschool.  unusual  read  books  homeschoolers  John  about  had  and  grain  the  school  C h r i s t i an  'Christian'  a  brief  children  cluster  development  library  alI  two  III Traditional  with  parents  the  child  cluster  advice  were  for  on  homeschooIing  That  her  education  widely  always  examples?  only  The  to  Jh_;_E_*_____s_£^  AI I t h e  the  i n f l u e n c e d them  and  that,  learning believing  the  a  structure  and  Although  the  personality example,  or  Native  religious  appropriate to  background  their  place  final  for  made h e r  d e c i s i o n based based  cluster  parents  III  Montessori. attending  The  did  n e t wor k'  £2  The with  the  school  not  they  look for  had  that  program. into  rejection Parents  from  a  reading.  been  looking  certain  III  Traditional  two  of  school  needs  f o r m a l l y but  how  when  from  parent  and  a  third  Montessori  they  came  both  and  of  Montessori  on  on  across  spoke  a  and  regular  Traditional  relied  came  'right  parents  IV  they  development,  friend  the  was  the  Montessori  deciding  cluster  as  i t evolved  child  Immersion  finally  asked  felt  were  decision  All three for  met  The  of  respected  her  French  the  One  child.  children  felt  were  her  decision (for  their  alI  knowledge  before  options  that  for  child's  their  conviction.  regarding  options  their  homeschoo I e r s  her  on  cluster  meetings  considering  on  parent)  system'  the  The  information  indicated  educational  public  on  for  , they  learning.  religious  appropriate  f a c e t s of  support  or  decision. or  more  mentioned  reasons  events  (the  as  background)  previous  another  was  gave  homeschooIers  of  on  given  homeschool e r s  two  partially based  guidance  the  parents 'parent  i n f o r mat i o n .  lbs-Parent^  homeschooIers one's  opportunity  a l l agreed  children for  the  was  a  child  that  the  b e n e f i t of to  opportunity  to  homeschooling,  f o l l o w h i s or  her  own  spend as  was  time the  interests.  The-  non-aligned  environment  was a b e n e f i t ,  homeschooIers Montessori program also  person.  as I  mentioned  either down  as important.  parent  praised  aligned  homeschool e r s both  that  sometimes  which but  would  under  parent. provide  t o comment said  concern  at  and group  and c r a f t s  Christian  beneficial  homeschooler  to older  children  course of  described the school while  the Factor  both  with  mentioned  from  the child  i n the- c l a s s r o o m ?  had t o be d e a l t  areas  The non-  no p r o b l e m s  'resistance'  t o ensure  her mother  Iigent  'flexible'.  evidenced  experiences  which  the* b r o a d  by a t e a c h e r  length her e-fforts  c h o i c e s o r by  h i m a s an i n t e l  homeschooIers  circumstances  was  as being  on t h e ' h e a d a c h e s ' .  encountered  was a l s o  of the Montessori  t o make  education  the»re w e r e  the Christian  the parent  of the  f o r the- c h i l d '  I I I parent  expertise i n a II necessary  individual  Another  asked  homeschooling  described  arts  mentioned  for being  n o r m a l l y be- h a n d l e d  Some  'respect  'well-rounded'  were  while  Two  focus  by " t r e a t i n g  parents  Parents  homeschooIing  one o f t h e C h r i s t i a n  ' r e s p e c t ' was s e e n  One c l u s t e r  a  non-competitive  blessing.  while This  the schools  also  least  t h e academic  to the child?  the child  the  by p e r m i t t i n g t h e c h i l d  The- t r a d i t i o n a l  giving  at  i t was a m i x e d  t o be? i m p o r t a n t .  talking  indicated  while  t o be an a t t r a c t i o n ?  felt  studies  felt  parents  demonstrated not  homeschool e r s  about  with  by t h e  the inability  to  and one homeschooler her c h i l d  had  both  a n d was p r o p e r l y i n s t r u c t e d i n d i d not feel  competent  noted  that  competition  to give  them  a sense  to teach.  might  o f what  be  their  104 strengths his  and  abilities  While  one  and  one  'school  were.  because  had  Montessori  Montessori I  weaknesses  were on  he  parent  Montessori'  not  the  I I I were was  parents?  f a r more  Montessori  c u r r i c u l u m and  method  curriculum  of  schools.  of  parent  program? Waldorf Two  the  of  teachers?  public  former  school? the  cluster  both  traditional  IV  felt  that  class  The  other  cluster  teacher  year  after  year  pub I i c  The  f i t the The of  program  moving  IV  might  cluster  felt  and  their  Montessori  I?  and  funding  were  be  a  felt  problem  III parents  had  be  the  that  from  no  the or  were  each  the  asked  what  other  on for  the  new  complaints  educational  qualities  a  parent  or  child  systems.  HomeschooIing  the  program.  problems  the  to  schools  having  for  the  children.  traditional  cluster  loaded  refusal  the  child  one  parent  who  to  the  amongst  the and  parent?  she  c o n s i d e r i n g the  size  structure  other  what  hiring  primary about  needed  parents  the  same  schools.  Parents of  two  distort  competition  parents?  school.  program.  trying  Montessori  latter  of  for to  that  roundly  i mp o r t a n c e  to  cluster  felt  for  considering private  the  One  children,  and  considered  on  the  highly critical  e x i s t e n c e of  had  the  down p l a y i n g t h e  motivate  s t r u c t u r e i n the  acknowledge These  f or  in  of  one  ' b a s t a r d i z e d v e r s i o n ' and  trained  lack  critical.  faith  compete.  two  improperly  was  to  other  materials to  III?  chance  lacked  disadvantages  attractive  Factor  the  son  the  the  B.C.  her  that  criticized  on  s y s t em  a  felt  had  felt  negligible,  cluster  She  for  felt  the  105 variously  that  parents  they  enjoy  being  with  children.  parents  must  be  must  remarked  that  needed  respect  the  a u t h o r i t y of  teach.  The  non-aligned  could  benefit  from  homeschooIer.  The  need may  patience not  be  break. more the  than  also  system  touch would  a l l children  that  some m i g h t  they  with  of  noted?  irony) The  would  need  benefit?  a  full  'somewhat  to  the  options  other  but  favourable  than  parent  was  extremely  warmly  towards  herself  the  the  had  other  happy  happy'  said  All  cluster  that  parents  hyperactivity  parents  may  need  III parent  with  needed from  less  faith  cluster  III  a  that I  contented  but  were  slightly  favoured to  felt  parent?  Montessori  that  perhaps  One  but  'extremely' saying  Montessori  cluster She  completely  I Montessori  Montessori  for  she  homeschooling  rank  Montessori.  program  with  noted  cluster  they  program. with  children  dose'.  some t e n d e n c y  regular  other  parent  demurred  happy.  regular  The  'somewhat  one  the  The  all  severe  benefit?  'seven-year  while  extremely'  homeschooling.  would  homeschoolers  homeschooling  the  more s t r u c t u r e .  need  who  parents  satisfied  didn't  four  the  must  Christian  (the c l u s t e r  that  child  parent, c o u l d n ' t  one  as  that  homeschooler  the  that  with  for homeschooIing  a l l children  the  did  children  that  of  felt  felt  that  that  the  homeschooler  felt  Three  or  homeschooIers as  dedication?  Christian  practical  work.  that  parent  h i s parents  liontessorians  a  A  and  p a t i e n t and  homeschooling  suitable  The  confidence  I  was over more  Montessori  also  felt  quite  rejected  program  one  happy  of  her  ranked children  106 and  'somewhat  'pure  Montessori'  she  ranked  The  cluster  as  to  regular  program.  Montessori  parent  environment  and  felt on  happy'  her  nor  the  one  regular an  cluster  traditional  parent  opportunity  to  live  the IV  the  was  in she  option  The  with  the  program  to  One  educated  in a  rural  ranked She?  isolated felt?  however? settings  but  i t a l l depended  parent  traditional  traditional  ranked  program.  regular  and  regular  happy"  equally.  only  the  the  highly  exception?  been  an  because?  felt  equally  program?  program  for  wouId  not  move t o  cluster  III  traditional  traditional  i n an  than  very  with  but?  as  reason  needs.  two  would  had  program  and  program.  homeschooIing.  who  than  ' s l i g h t l y happy'  regular  I traditional  h omesc h o o I e r s  cluster  IV  to  ranked  favourably  system  preferred the  She  regular  'extremely  option  Montessori  would  as  Montessori  child's  as  one  the  other.  more  the  any  with  with  herself  chosen  the  s l i g h t l y better  effective  The  had  n o n - a I i g ned  of  as  rank  homeschooling  the  toward  from  education one  just  earlier?  stemming  Th e  and  not  in cluster  felt  teacher.  favourably noted  the  or  herself  parents?  homeschooIing  i t was  the  did  A l l but  and  Montessori'  only  ranked  traditional  considered  be  'somewhat  I parent  homeschooling  fact  for  homeschooIing  described  Traditional  cluster  the  in  Montessori  ranked  'school  She  The  themselves  with  III parent  Montessori  program.  but  either  Montessori. felt  unhappy'  parents.  homeschool  her  isolated  area  The  children  another  parents  other  B.C.  had  of  nor  cluster  i f she  in northern  s y s t em  IV  the  The*  107 remaining her  traditional  younger  child  intend  a t some  school  or p e r h a p s  Montessori  regular for  time?  public said  she might  send  had c o n s i d e r e d  The  cluster  When  parent  to  teach?  care the  sending  didn't  enough  homeschoolers  'real  world'  schooling.  didn't  send  was  other  h a d t o work?  their  their  children.  children  was  elitist?  were u n d i s c i p l i n e d  find  a  i n i t s respect parent,  or a Waldorf  to late  French  school  Immersion.  considering sending  her  t h e one that parents  d i d or j u s t  The t r a d i t i o n a l  beliefs  their  that  parents  to Montessori  children  were felt  expert  didn't felt  from  incompatible that  the with  parents  because  they  didn't  of the options?  felt  Montessori  like  parents  lacked  parents  t o o s t r u c t u r e d or had h e a r d  and d i d n ' t  The t r a d i t i o n a l  than  stated that  to protect  themselves  i t was  options  b e l i e v e d o n e had t o b e an  The M o n t e s s o r i  trouble to inform felt  I  out of  I Montessori  t h e damage s c h o o l s  were t r y i n g  the  aspects.  choose  or had r e l i g i o u s  public  also  cluster  she could  school  her daughter  Christian  program.  realize  about  her c h i l d  Factor  send  homeschooIers  to private  t o Montessori  t h e homeschooIers  perhaps  I? m i g h t  The c o n t e n t e d  n o t move  was s i m i l a r  parents  had chosen  confidence?  children  school.  she would  III Montessorian  why  their  her son t o p r i v a t e  to the regular  asked  high  on c l u s t e r  T h e two C h r i s t i a n  The d i s c o n t e n t e d  and  child  loaded  i f s h e had t o s h e f e l t  which  the children.  said  t o send  however?  program  who  to Montessori.  parent  Montessori?  parent?  the children  the non-competitive?  felt  the Montessori  take  ungraded?  parents  108 thought  their  Although  There  children  'elitism'  were  were  was  not  'special charged  varying degrees  of  amongst  homeschooIers  not  predict  problems.  'test  case'  to  homeschool i n g split  as  parent  to  was  trying  was  unsure. would  foreseeable they  would  cluster  IV  be.  be  The  from  people, positive new  There-  become  the  public  their  one  not  toward program  was  effect  the  no  new  feeling  was  so  primary  I parent  program. similar  did  be  a  One  the  were  cluster  school  board parent  parents  felt  the  to  how  willing  matters  with  could  become  school  would  I  be  system  one  i f  dramatic  system.  to  program  method. felt  'true Montessorians' new  parents  they  in the  four  to  III Montessori  there  to.  that  c o n s i s t e n c y as  felt  the  wiI l i n g  Traditional  reform  educational  cluster  the  felt  of  in schooling in  I parent  I parent  chosen  IV  changes  was  continue.  other  alluded  three  Montessori  cluster  I I I and  school  felt  the  method.  government  requirement  would  The  about  involved in educational  cluster  cluster  the  but  dramatic  involved to  Montessorians  the  to  grow,  the  i t was  parent  The  program  i t out.  future.  homeschooIers  away  the  cluster  no  and  changes t o  No  phase  One  register.  liked  although  government's  i t would  The  be  politically need  whether  to  the  parents  sure  was  there  defy  or  openly,  concern  intervention actively  '.  The  would  Among  i t might  while  the  cluster  Montessori  lure  them  attract  some  the  other  was  III parent that  quite believed  i t removed  true  109 choice  from  didn't  work,  child.  The  I  parents  the she  school wanted  was  very  The  moderate  enthusiasm  be  parents to  as as  that  alternative  parents  enthused,  felt  a  had  mixed  was  one  child  described  i f  Montessori  program  for  responses.  cluster in a  IV  rural  her  The  parent  as  who  had  two-room  i t i n words r a n g i n g  d e s c r i b i n g themselves  cluster  'worried'  from and  s k ep t i c i sm.  complete found  other  She  clear  family grouping  school.  A  a  traditional  experienced  general  system.  description  i n Appendix  V  of .  the  interviews, arranged  by  Factor  can  110  CHAPTER RESULTS:  DESCRIPTION  5 OF  THE  PARENT B E L I E F  CLUSTERS  Overview The  following  factor  chapter  arrays?  the  is a  synthesis  analysis  of  of  the  variance  of  results the  from  the  and  the  items  interviews.  T h e _ F a c t o r . _ A r _ay_s: Before  discussing  arrays? united  i t should parents.  V a r _ e t _ es,_gf JBe.[.i.ef s _ A m o n g s t ...Parents those be  All  noted  could  create  qualities  which  were  love  of as  degree?  universal  learning  a  and  moderately devices Where felt  a  inherent  method  do low  certain  parents  All of  and  in  the  parents  optimistic  rating  children  would to  this autodidactic  to  the  spend  agreed  differ urge  was  could  telling  his  groups?  time  that  i f  playing  in  the  be  trusted  statements that  natural  seemed  b e l i e f that? All  factors  encouraging  strongly  There  various  strongly  by  child?  statement their  the  rather  also  learning.  i t spontaneously.  b e l i e f s began  chiId.  of  separated  'lifetime' learners  learning.  discovery  which  that  groups  education  and  items  degree to  curiosity  favoured to  be?  to  children for  to  do  enjoy  example  left and  some  to  their  learn which  educate  gave  a own  little. they  the  Ill It  should  have  be  been  designed  borne  taken to  all  nor  However,  the  preferred  by  analysis  of  describe  the  items  can  more or  homeschoolers,  the  tendency the  ANOVA  clarify  less  from  analysis  analysis  of  differences  second  the  discussion  A)  E_ ._*r.„Axr a ^  The  beliefs  that  any a  to  to  the  raw  individual  This data  groups  be and  the  belief  clusters.  expressed  i n the  factor  of  is  the  using  a  use+d t o to  beliefs  arrays  philosophy  data  on  examined.  the  factor  on  factor.  the  certain  between  items  can  factor  favour  particular  particular  factor  not  The  can  types  four  of  factor  significantly than  the*  Q-sort  came  between-groups  describe  tentatively  support  c  also  be  this  factor  would the  of  on  philosophy  decision  homogeneous  parents  individual  did  composed  d e s c r i b e * d and  each  the  was  data  was  t hemseIves  be  the  the  Q-sort  can  of  varience. between  unique,  factor  approach of  a  to  factors  I I , which  that  whether  three ar r ange  of  favourable to  A  gr oup  formed  of  structured  Factor  themselves  cluster  others. the  only  approaches  These  dec i s i ons  fact,  factors  The  factors.  variance within  while  arrays  In  different  study.  three  d i d t he  factors.  Christian  that  within the  predict  mat e r i a I i z e, unique*  i n mind  be  ten  beliefs,  d e s c r i b e d as I oade*d  considered Montessori  array  of  p r o g r e s s i v e , Rousseauian  a l l the  non-aligned  "pedagogues" parents  therefore, are  not  and  i n Van  one  unique  or  I could  romantic.  homeschool e r s , Galen's  traditional to  factor  sense,  On  those seven  parent.  homeschoolers,  might  but  who of  These capture  the  essence  least so  of the beliefs  one parent  far very  system they  happy  do n o t a l s o  her c h o i c e .  see a teacher  f o l l o w s h i s needs,  practices  that  A  stifle  a r e encouraged  others  'self-esteem'  carefully  interests,  he  Factor  array  I ranked  that  a child  guide  requires higher is  than  seen  encouraged education who  love  knowledge  factor  freedom  Factor  were array  people  and seek  n o t among  own  goals  I shares  loves  Discovery manner their  who  truth.  those  own  a r e happy  i s avoided without  by  that  and  comparison background.  following the him as  self-esteem  significantly or  'real  life'  learning. Children are values.  The goal  and w e l l  Statements  most  —  restrictive  methods of  learning  and a c c e p t i n g  education  favoured,  I seems t o be t h e n a t u r e  i n the learning  array  h i s own  and c l a r i f y  assuming  i s at the centre  t o be enhanced  effective*  i s to create  curriculum of  to create  who  Competition  the statement  factors.  t o b e t h e most  beliefs  avoiding  respecting h i s feelings  d i d other  and i s  the school  where- s t r u c t u r e * i s i n the*  child's is.  traditionally  these  The c h i l d  i s felt  and o f a t  beliefs.  to set their  i n an a t m o s p h e r e  child's  holding  creativity.  parents  suggests  as a person  person.  education  to  This  homeschooIing  as a resource  children  Montessori her c h i l d  some p a r e n t s  hold  I parents  acts  has schooled  with  i s satisfying  Cluster and  who  o f some  about  of  adjusted  and  the  a s t h e main  of the child  focus  and h i s  situation.  with  a l l other  clusters  except  factor  array  113 II, to  a  strong  the  rejection  Bible  encouraging ethnic  for  c h i l d r e n to  of  such  encouraging  respect  traditional  classroom  rejected  striving defined Not  for by  are  for  learners'  exposing  children to  learning' higher  array  and  than  III  and  IV).  the  statement  is a  the  that  array  factor from  arrays  They  alone  that  children  were  good  teacher  wants  learn,  that  education  they  significantly  to  were  letting  the  child.  c h i l d r e n set  organization  and  are  With more their  more  they  and  of  and  children. tests,  excellence  institutional  that  subjects,  the  memorisation,  standard  array  learn  a  of  views  same  leader  idea  i t can  II)  or  that  be  life two  ranks  is parental.  'creating  accomplished  by  'schooling  best  let the should the  child  select  than  than  what  of the  the  child  factor  c l u s t e r s II of  to  arbitrary  c l u s t e r e d on  standards  favourable  no  (factor  favourable  atmosphere  inflict  parents  significantly  factors'  more  i n an  favourable own  'discovery  experiences'  significantly  that  standards  or  curriculum.  the  freedom, to  adult  and  or  real  of  values,  religious  r e j e c t s those  I r e j e c t s the  rigorous  (with  their  tradition  an  drill  frivolous  'learning  do  and  a u t h o r i t i e s by  lifetime  of  a l l c h i l d r e n the  s t r u c t u r e of  factor  referring  a n t i - i n d i v i d u a l i s m or  authority  when  statements:  J'udeo-Chr i s t i a n  values  I also  teaching  excellence  outside  factor  as  the  array  l e a r n i n g by  surprisingly,  This  accept  Factor  religious  encouraging  authoritarianism,  traditionalism,  Also  a l l the  curriculum,  community.  redolent  of  neatness  and  IV, III  and  'schoolers'  to  the  114 statement good  that  a t , not  favourable children cluster  education  f o r c e them  to cluster  to  learn  should  help  t o do what  children  they  II t o t h e b e l i e f  i s from  other  IV t o b e l i e v e t h a t  dislike. that  children  there  learn  what  They  the best  and more  i s nothing  they  are  a r e more  was f o r  favourable  a l l children  than  need  to  I earn.  The  overall  the  child  picture  choosing  atmosphere value  array  i s imposed,  no g o a l s  has ranks  significantly more  C)  h i s own  liberal  with  Iiberal  only  h i s own  background  external  than  arrays  structure.  authorities.  conservative views of Factors  -  standards,  c r e a t e s h i s own.  and p r a g m a t i c / m o d e r a t e  the factor  Lactor,._Ar r a y . 1 1 s  setting  the child  a r e s e t by  higher do  one o f a c h i l d - c e n t r e d e d u c a t i o n tasks,  non-competitive  system  testing,  becomes  No  There This  the  i s no  factor  views  and  i s significantly  I I , I I I or  _ E d u c a t _ o n _ a s _ P r e g . a r a t ion.„for  IV.  _Res_onsib_e  _ _ y. ______ _ On  Factor  making array from a  I I , loaded  this,  life  flexible  array  examples  taught  the Christian or moral  II p r e f e r s d i s c o v e r y Parents  to static  b y people-  o f moral  only  a Christian  experiences.  (as opposed  curriculum, are  perhaps,  I, f a c t o r real  a l l and  who  behaviour.  on  factor.  Like  learning  and  this  belief  or c o n s t a n t l y love  homeschoolers  learning,  factor learning  cluster  want  changing) love children  Children should  learn  in a  and  115 mainly  cooperative  groups  or with  structure, encourage citizens  Not  with  as  that  statements  having  high  given  knowledge  and seek  moral  children  do n o t need  free  the  traditional  prerequisite decided  and w h i l e  having  fee Ii ngs.  Factor  that  near  age o f s i x , s p e c i a l i z e d or that  education  should  help  or  Also  A of the  learn  held  t h e same need  by  classroom  before  or even a t  as a should  low s t a n d i n g  children  own  other  a l l children  training  gives  values.  rules.  the curriculum  II a l s o  which  standards,  from  the traditional entry  be  to  those  the bottom  that  school  could  Rejected  a l l children  nothing  rejects  Factor  best  of a s e t of b e l i e f s  children),  for teachers  good  creating their  of external  rates  with  by e x p e r t s .  suggestion  learn  curriculum  be e x p e c t e d  (an a d u l t  guidance.  children  children  i s r e j e c t e d , so i s having  setting  were  societal  things  this  array  t o question  that  should  t o be  chosen  children  array  homeschoolers,  adult  have  arbitrary  factor  As might  truth,  not i n f l i c t  or i n an atmosphere  learn.  Education  should  children  a s welI  i s background  II adherents  on t h i s  advocating  i s the belief  changing  array  C h r i s t i a n s who  rejected  constantly  factor  statements  teach  between  standards.  t h e bottom  i t should  competition  There  choices.  fundamentalist  education  modified  some  that  include those  that  with  performance.  t o love  and t o have  homeschool,  values,  past  children  children  described  that  one's  surprisingly,  implied  environment,  be to the  recognize  their  116  Although 1.00  or  not  ranked  above)  factor  favourable  than  statements  included  curriculum  and  values.  During  that  these  both  cases,  did  seeking  and  that  the  to  religious  on  would  that  II  the  ranked  by  on  may  should  be  taught  by  person  r e s p o n s i b l e for teaching the  The  ANOVA  of  Factor  those  stating  II  the  parents  d i d not  to  their  not  of  could  that  the  unduly to  that  one* c o u l d  child  or  child  by  any  on  In  the  force knowledge  'to love  Jesus' of  unanimous  who  suspicious their  when  beliefs.  loaded  on  decide  what  consulting  significantly  loaded  list.  factors,  those  indicate  the  surprise  by  not  children  three  be  the  'loving  like  who  belief  set  amused  that  other  II,  statements  did  one  i s inimical  ranked  than  rather  However,  the  I,  favourably  top  i n encouraging  factor  consulting  more  These  standards  felt  lead  school  factor  arrays.  the  that  atmosphere*.  parents  at  both  was  items  of  accept Judeo~Christian  seemed  They  public  loaded  to  .-scores  interviewer expressed  responded  influence  religious  Biblical  probably  Christian  cluster  who  to  Cie. those  factor  children  responsibility  rejection  Parents  three  were not  believe.  in a  assert  ranked  i n t e r v i e w e e s , who  knowledge  they  referring  items  interviews, the  truth'  the  top  II?  other  assumptions,  their  suggests  the  encouraging  the  person  and  the  array  statements  researcher's another  among  factor  preference  the*  more I I I or  for  one  IV.  117 philosophy. randomly.  This  loadings  that  these  that  modelled  parents  those  higher  rankings  portrayal  II  array is a  some c h o i c e or  from  of  the  child  which up  depart  to  but?  from  it".  other  children  appropriate the  role  your  II  parents  set  Biblical go  models. "Who  child?"  relatively  do  Both  of  One you  liberal  II  for  when  than  beliefs  methods  idea  that  from  child  goals  the  most  array  II  he  up  adults  the  the  duality their  of  as not  importance  become?  with  not  spoke  inexperience? of  is  the  wiI I  group  to  in concert  have  specific  i s old  remark  the  "train  in this  items  'discovery'  factor  and  the  Factor  Perhaps  to  group  should  by  learn  express  by  best  he  a  that.  education  youth  your  simply  child  child.  must  best  a  the  parents  their  want  as  I with  parent's  seems t o  suggests  significantly  admonition  and  children  because  array  than  learn  the  array  should  generally  beliefs  question  that  rejects  factor  he  that  will  within  the  of  Factor  into  accepts  however? from  the  statements.  and  (Prov.22:6)  are?  set  I in giving  is called  learn  cards  correlation  homeschoolers  which  sorted  factor?  sort-resort  array  to  beliefs  questions  for  parents  way  the  i t i s more complex  set  cluster  i n the  strong  best  for  relate  their  of  II?  belief  that  of  parents  more e c l e c t i c  beliefs  feature comparing  sense  goals?  a  Christian  learning spring  striking the  the  life  high  conservative  i n what  real  and  factor  conservative  factor  array  of  these  structured Q-sort.  of  to  that  homogenaeity  reflect  i n the  from  on  the  thereupon  differ  holding  indicate  However?  high  Any  may  What's of  the  quite  118 t r a d i t iona I  goaIs.  E, _ „feor _ 1 1 1 5  C*  .Ed u c a t ion _ a s _ t b e... A c q u i_s i.t _on _ o f ._a _B o d _ _o f  ____L__,Q_ r  Three  Montessori  Factor  III.  importance wide  on t h i s  A model  children  working  love  is  array  vocational,  based  on t h i s  subjects,  i n a cooperative  Teachers  would  pleasant,  Self-esteem high  array  suitable  decide  teaching  hard  of education  what way  from  with  work  by having  and  own  limited  generation  teaching  t o learn  what  and  what  i s not.  the children  meet  discipline.  rejects religion as well  love  t o learn  or t r a d i t i o n  as leaving  on t h e c u r r i c u l u m  as a  the curriculum  to generation.  h e w a n t s t o l e a r n was a l s o  t o decide  would  their  methods o f  children  t o be f o r c e d  I I I vehemently  unchanged  appropriate  have  t o be enhanced  through  focus  basically child  i s seen  standards  Factor  may  following  environment  that  a  l e i s u r e and  b e i n t e l I i g c * n t a n d wel I e d u c a t e d  It i s acknowledged they  t o cover  factor array  then  c h i l d r e n p r e f e r r i n g t o use discovery learning.  I oe*ded o n  i s given  and a s i s i t s a b i l i t y  academic,  basic  Traditional parents  of the curriculum  classroom  learning  competition.  and  factor  v a r i e t y o f s k i I Is;  interests,  and t h r e e  The f l e x i b i l i t y  lifestyle. see  parents  Letting the  rejected and a s an  a s an appropriate  practice.  Generally,  the 'laissez-faire'  approach  to directing  children's  119 learning an  was  atmosphere  much  effort  statement good  want  of  than  or t h a t  children  the child  in  r e j e c t e d a s was  the  should  let a child  t o do  what  teach  a child  should  best how  were  f o r c e him  both  learn  decide  a task  you cannot  to parents  significantly and  more  forced  what  t o do  flexible  find  o u t what  i s difficult  he i s  or  something  i t was  par en t s  in t h i s  cluster  still  he  doesn't  factor  array.  that  cluster.  hard  wor k,  factors.  b u t may  unpleasant. important  a significantly  a truly  between  They  that  also  children  h a v e t o be  Although  on o t h e r higher  that  traditional  times  a  factor  ranking  what  This  that  i s taught  factor  array  seI f d i sc ip I i n e  children  who  Factor  I I I put  may  cluster.  a t t h e t o p and  a r e a means t o a c h i e v i n g  acknowledging on  as  several  I t seems  accomplishment  loaded  given  t o be  are mentioned  belief  rated  own,  parents  a balance  t o the statement  their or  other  III  by  cI u s t e r .  seems  in this  on  cluster  to providing  were  ranking  enjoy  was  topics  parents  than  i s difficult  curriculum  clusters,  favourable  higher  they  what  arrays,  i n other  cooperation  significantly  wiI I l e a r n  This  on  that  that  t o know.  competition gave  and  education  at rather  comparison  were  The b e l i e f s  freedom  t o expend  that  unpleasant  In  dismissed.  need,  and  Curriculum  bottom  i s important ranks  of the to the  highly the  personaI  self-esteem.  Statements  a s one- M o n t e s s o r i  parent  i t "a k i c k  i n the butt  factor"  to  succeed noted to  were  that  learn  What  ranked  highly.  children  because  i s taught  can not j u s t  they  was  Another  "need  parent?  decide  to  a grounding  mentioned  i n the interviews?  the r i c h n e s s of the Montessori  not  down'  discuss  why  were  were  The need  comments  and  moderated  should  were  regarded  scepticism.  to the regular  thought  her c h i l d  would  teaching  i s . "  the  teachers  as being public  Even  t h e most  that  when  "boring these  parents? on  Society?  were* v e r y  who  parent  with  one  want  parent  because  i t was  the questions  parents  o f an  school  helped  was  parent  "least  of either  to  details by  of the  interviewees  atmosphere  up  how  matter  but  parents  or  non-executive  bad on  felt  of the options. commented  were  that  she  positively  given  sense' the  slyly  the  a l l three  of  or  Montessori  at the school?  meetings.  considering  no  keen"  t h e PTA  was  that  commented  they  fondness  commented  'political  in helping  t h e open  and  t o note?  in a  the only  parent  obnoxious"  at the school?  involved  attended  and  of the three  not a c t i v e  being  a certain  to "catch  "enthusiastic  the executive  regularly  able  A traditional  while  they  basics."  mentioned  program  It i s interesting  involved  traditional  be  enthusiastic  parents  jobs".  give  The M o n t e s s o r i  her c h i l d  the  what  expected.  sending  traditional  from  f o r s t r u c t u r e was  was  teachers  with  school  diverged  interviewed?  program  describing the d e s i r a b i l i t y  achievement  Schools  another  the public  curriculum. as  while  learn  in the  applauding 'pared  when  member  one o f t h e PTA  121  Al I three* p a r e n t s children  rearing  alternative  but  Immersion.  defend  certain  the  extent  of  was  "unsure"  quite*  tended  programs?  French  district.  were  The  joining  two  a  i f there noted  to  be  broadly  political  to  group.  was  any  threat  that  the  program  two  parents  school  to  rejecting  said  they  some d e g r e e  The  still  would  but  Montessori  Montessori  was  on  All considered  Montessori?  traditional their  informed  sceptical.  one* c h o o s i n g  f e a t u r e s of  She  wel I a n d  in  not  to  parent the  turning  people  away.  These  parents  program. like  so  commented  noting  isn't  working?  non-competitive*  othe*rwise*.  an  but  ungraded be  big not  she*  about  the  new  primary  "supposed"  she  would  aspect  successful. and  the  mix-up". impressed?  alternative  and  and  Another  new The  i t had  the  noted  primary  system  that  program  Montessori  concurred  teacher  "If  and  parent? Montessori  is  going  everybody."  array to  a  was  for  factor  the* m a t e r i a l  acquire? t h e  she  said  Montessori  like  I want  Montessori  general?  with  that  the  probably  between  sceptical  parents  liked  " I t sound  after  In  she  i t would  similarity  toward  somewhat  One* t r a d i t i o n a l  i t because  support the  were a l s o  be  III  i s an  taught.  array  The  i t i s considered  i n f o r m a t i o n even  i f they  which  environment  concerns  i s humane  important  that  happen  prefer  to  itself  the* to  and  students do  array  Factor items  III  which  Interviews a  group  as  ranks  could with  of well  of  seems  described  i n d i v i d u a l s on  volunteers.  that  be  moderate  items as  conservative.  loaded  on  Factor  who  The  'sceptical'  the educational  them.  system  who  They  beyond  than  or  parents  to describe  higher  liberal  informed term  significantly  are involved i s one  do  they  n o t seem  III suggested  with used  the and  school i s one  t o ask a great  transmitting  deal  information  humane I y b u t e f f e e t i v e I y .  D  E d u c a t i o n _. f o r . _Ha _ _ i.e r_ _ P e o _ J_e ______ . . B e t t e r _ W o r l d  ______IV. s  The  parents  They  who  tended  loaded  to agree  on  with  didn't  like?  but h e l d  Factor  array  IV, b e s i d e s  lifetime natural like the  creativity  factor value  array  views  competition  to  enhance  do  creative things. catalyst  methods  rather  The  than  i s increased  teacher  they  the ubiquitous  by  encouraging  for learning, of a  and  by  should  actually teaching.  like.  that  children's acknowledged, curriculum,  learning,  and  cooperative  them  love  they  statement  I t i s deemed  giving  parents.  what did  flexible  i n a mainly  restricted.  children's creativity  about  what  of teaching  of c h i l d r e n working with  about  favouring  enthusiasm  all traditional  III parents  I I I , the importance  of discovery  environment  esteem  unique  and  IV w e r e  cluster  l e a r n e r s can be c r e a t e d  desirability  a  Factor  important  opportunities  learning  The c h i l d ' s  by r e s p c - c t i n g h i s f e e l i n g s and  and  to  act as  self-  accepting  the  123 child  a s he o r s h e i s .  people  who  love  The g o a l s  knowledge  of education  and seek  are to  t r u t h a n d who  create  will  improve  soc i et y.  Factor  array  education belief  bottom  that  most  or  that  Near  as a  that  the  IV s h a r e s forum  array.  suggest  I earn  that  education  i s a n d how  another  stating  that  defined  by e x t e r n a l  instituticms).The  education.  f o r school  array  c h i l d r e n should sources  statement  o f freedom  (parents? that  was a l s o  thing  after  once  found  are there.  both  statements  decide  how  and  for excellence  teachers?  children  at  age s i x  they  h e wiI I e x p e n d  strive  rejected  places the  r e j e c t s the idea  let the child  effort  of  the curriculum  until  i s also  should much  It also  i n deciding  t h e same  of the factor  a task  atmosphere  aII  III a rejection  It strongly  c h i l d r e n a r e not ready should  array  has any p l a c e  of the factor  they  important  factor  for religious  tradition  t h e bottom  which  with  learn  or  formal  best  strongly  as  on  i n an factor  array  IV.  The  items  taught?  rejected  with  environment with  pursuit In  t o deal  an acknowledgement which  rejection  importance  seemed  both  of  letting  c h i l d r e n can't  the child  on a s u b j e c t  of the attainment with  that  with  what i s learn  i n an  h a s no r u l e s or s t r u c t u r e and i n t e r e s t i n g l y ?  to place  interviews  predominately  choose  how  and o f e n c o u r a g i n g  of external  standards  t h e two r e p r e s e n t a t i v e  of  parents?  much the  vigourous  excellence. i t appeared  that  both  were  concerned  felt  that  many  children  message they  The  was,  must  children  not  positive  change  society  II,  did  The  give  any  they  of  term  could  not  attain  cannot  are  choose  interesting  parents  "Education and  the  should  them the  in this teach  the  tools  to  other  three  groups.  a  valid  education  children  to  be  education values, factor  this  factor  to  array  III.  their  own  favourably  to  Like  higher  standards  the  equally,  of  of  enthusiasm  children  to  enjoy  school  and  some  length  d i s c u s s i n g what  at  as  issues.  One  parent  the  i s wrong  with  concert of  with  creating as  as  that  they  to  higher cluster  good of  teaching  are.  Although  lower  than  favouring  Judeo-Christian  than  that  given  by  organization  lack  digressed  social  neatness  own  i n high  IV  on  a  encouraging  two  social  both  I parents.  The  loaded  what  well  conform  ranked  who  ranked  statement  cluster  cluster  of  significantly  was  interviewees  by  was  for the  children  as  themselves  gave  II  In  approving  significantly  I and  set  accept  array  factor  also  of  and  encouraging  arrays  children  goal  happy  i t was  but  fix i t " significantly  as  by  goals,  also  children  citizens  given  they Thus,  prominence  cluster  more  that  own  i n the  significantly  ranking  excellence.  their  were  the  " e x c e l l e n c e " as  pushed.  items  item.  statement  than  be  with  and  parents.  Factor  school  learning  IV  and  both  more  described  both  than  could a  mentioned  wanted they best  friend's  their  their had.  be  Both  described  insensitive  treatment out  of  by  a  school  simply  school leaving  'marking about  integrated  into  her the  Parents  handicap  society.  They  distasteful  to  banished  want  They  One  noted  ability that  two  not them  only  the  i t . school  the  be  They  the  unfit  the  the  were  system  or  had  other  'parent's the  both to  of  the  spoke child  did  not  had  a  detail  moderate  improve  competition  more  alternative,  want  competition  regard  public  to  being  his pushed.  school  was  the  although  she  noted  behavioral  less  widely  other  educational network'.  it:.  and  disturbances  school.  One  child  groups.  They  to  on  options,  system  q u i t e wiI l i n g  support  of  needs,  i n the  regular  friend  help  children  severe  read  to  without  of  drop  normal.  not  for public  parents  with  do  idea of  variety  child  find  advantages  wide  considered  satisfied  They  to  youngest  she  system  they  c o n d i t i o n s or  had  the  close  her  rejection  accepted  interviewed  through  the  than  like  a  that  a  friend  other  Although  school  find  major  child  than  seriously  basically with  a  the  child  not  with  parents  development  the  medical  render  want to  The  intellectually  desirable.  do  cope  severe  might  The  to  was  IV  be  abilities. parent  intimated  the  without  getting  system.  unrealistic  competition, but  she  caused  graduation.  concerns-about  seem  and  until  but  in cluster  interviewee  school  c h i I d ' s problem  physical  the  time'  poignantly  the  c o u n s e l l o r which  and take  parent  were felt  They  hearing  about  both comfortable  action was  had  to  defend  enthusiastic  about  t h e impending  experienced the  other  unhappy  family grouping  was  explained  changes  "worried"  t o parents.  teachers  might  s h e had c o n s i d e r e d  mild  learning  that  public  large  group  seem  practice  parent?  Factor  i t probably public  i t should  who  how  noted  they  they  be  rebellious;  be  pushed;  be  disciplined  they  been  seriously could  occur  seem  sorting  s h e expe-cted  children were they  were  were  were  forced  to think  done.  what  world"? i t s  also  that  With  school  and g i v e n  impact.  loaded  her opinions?  really  wanted  on  never  amusement?  but a l s o t o  f o r themselves?  a l l their  year  in  s h e had  t o do.  a  parents i n  but not t o  work?  freedom?  t o ' a c t u p ' . S h e wondere-d?  about  they  or another  t o compete?  to think  better  i n too short  Although  the cards  t o be r e s p e c t e d  and not a l l o w e d  b e much  and t h e  c l a s s e s were t o o  b u t who  the school  t o learn  by t h e c o s t  i n minimizing  t o learn  t o learn  had a  i s the "real  interested  that  her c h i l d  material  13.  clearly  noted  be narrowed  i n Grade  competition  after  considered be  t o o much  while  One p a r e n t  because  school  either  school?  was c o n c e r n e d  wouldn't  was n o t a i n t e r v i e w e e ?  much  that  cooperate*;  having  t o feel  parent  b u t was d i s c o u r a g e d  She f e l t  IV c o m m e n t e d  realized  it  school  having  i t had not been  t h e changes.  private  that  on and g r a d u a t i o n  actual  she  school.  She b e l i e v e d  added  One  sabotage  system?  elementary  she f e l t  and t h e c u r r i c u l u m c o v e r e d  time.  this  because  disability  and d e c i d e d  i n her r u r a l  The e n t h u s i a s t i c  that  distance  i n the primary  but not but  also  after  i f p a r e n t s had  a n d how?  or  whether?  127 CHAPTER  VI  DISCUSSION  The  results  of t h i s  study  evolved  from  addressed  several  possible  instruments  and  The  of the  results  first.  The  discussed beliefs has to  from  done  compare  occuring  i n the previous  and  a r e more  differences  falI  how  and  child's  between  differences  are there  traditional  parents?  the  data  then  first?  t o compare  relationship using  the  discussed  seek  The  information  method  following  i n the previous  locus  and  chapter.  from  as be  naturally non-  actively  differ  groups.  chapter  a s members data  these  must  from  those  How  do  non-  C h r i s t i a n homeschoolers?  t h e n a t u r a l Iy o c c u r i n g  of control  arrays  approach  and  the  i s t o examine t h e  the Montessori  of the  another  factor  differ  environment  be  i s t o compare  the four  schoolers  from  amongst  first  must  i n t o which  who  differ  discussed  groupings  A third  i n light  t o one  locus  by  naturally occuring  homeschoolers  wiI I be  A second  educational  passive.  interest.  chapter.  a s k how  parents  of  interviews  The  as expressed  measurement  areas  measure  and  perspectives.  the superordinate  their  aligned  of control  of the Q-sort  three  groups  schoolers  who  results  of the parents  been  choose  locus  severatl  parents  groups  or t h e  attempts  of control and  What  to  approach  measures?  and  their  o f more g e n e r a l  the information  on  categories factors  k-£ _k __£^f._£I____2l ,  l  Caution  should  individuals  be  were  they  were a c t i v e  Both  activism  since  can  be  not  that  groups any  of  parents differ,  in  control  feel  chance  parents do  homeschooling  intermediate significant  The  literature  has  previously  homeschooling Powerful  group,  these  the  IPC  or  out  a  chance  the  i t i s  equally.  they  feel  the degree  and  however  these three  role.  reported than  sample,  and  It  groups they  t o which  are they  Traditional  powerful  others in  difference  are  that  than  an being  however,  of  although  separately,  d i d not  fundamentalist  individuals  appear  in a direction  factors.  dropped  play  groups  that  as  results, methods  t o which  scales,  examined  Others scale  homeschooler answer  not  volunteers.  the  because  scale.  external  In t h i s  were  c o n t r o l l e d by  not  both  Chance  a r e more  were  Montessori parents fall  the  homeschoolers  or  on  or  similar  much  the  chosen  alI three  as  others  parents.  by  as  were  confound  degree  c o n t r o l l e d by  position  fundamentalists.  the  lives  on  Christians  may  results  but  group  therefore,  i n the  powerful  more  or  affected  own  the  random  chosen  suggested not  at  school  were  bias  their  and  feel  selected  voluntarism  tentatively  of  in interpreting  in their  and  alI three  suggested  used  the Rotter  to affect  the  suggesting  they  that she  not  Christian form  study because because  are  they d i d  It i s noteworthy the  who  they one felt  d i d not  half Chance  felt Christian she  could  reflect  her  belief quite  in  God.  As  previously  idiosyncratic results  subjects  in  the they  of  measures  believe do  not  that  respondent? commented God  and  had  God  share  her  life  deviI?  but  others'  people  authority  It  becomes  interpret score  The  on  actions  parents  The  overall  controlled responsible  Locus  picture by  fate  for  responsibility  with  i t to  assumed world' she  that  sees  would  compar i n g  the  it —  answer  locus  p€*rsons  who who  One  Levenson  IPC?  others?  that  husbands?  bosses?  i t in  a  the  on  that  meant  that  score  the  questions  someone o u t s i d e high  on  degree.  powerful the  other  individuals  lesser  on  by  suggests  other  a  two  commented  This  questions  of  Control  homeschool feeling  and far  scale  that  belief P  scale  is  fashion. system or  a  to low  suggests and  that  powerful  differentiates clearly  other more  c h i l d ' s behaviour?  their and  share  the  so  group  and  gave  means.  their  per s o n a I i t y .  life  homeschooler  reason?  when  is controlled  what  who  and  or  for  parents  affect  similar  questions.  their  'the  I scale  homeschooling  a  inadequate  she  -—  therefore  Chi Id r e a r i n g  between  as  difficult  the  be  reading  'powerful in  may  the  belief  while  the  with  controls  this  that  for  another  C h r i s t i a n homeschooIing  difficulty control  mentioned?  parents?  strongly  and  c h i l d ' s development.  lack  of  that  intellectual  homeschooling  others  with  a t t r i b u t i o n of  more This events  their development  parents  feel  less  directly sense to  of  direct  outside  forces  seem  children. comments  In i n t e r v i e w s ? such  confident?  as  maybe  sympathetic because  to contribute to their  schooling parents  'To t e a c h  your  own  child  overconfident..'.  t o homeschoolers  she didn't  have  HomeschooIers?  schoolers  sent  their  of confidence  noted  that  i n turn?  children  in their  you need  t o be  she wouldn't  who  was  homeschool  and t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n a l  attributed  t o school?  abilities  their  f r e q u e n t l y made  A schooling parent  the confidence  ability.  lack  a c t i o n s i n homeschooling  the fact  i n part  to teach  the  to the schoolers  their  children  at  home.  Montessori  parents  Traditional This in  parents?  reflects  activist  felt  less  b u t more  previous  movements  feel  less  but n o n - a c t i v i s t  note  t h e homeschooIers?  the  professional  powerful  others  Traditional group  than  parents  and b o t h  controlled  educators'  that  controlled  individuals. who  have  homeschooIers. that  people  by c h a n c e  rejected  involved  than  less  a r e more  controlled  by chance likely  do to  the legitimacy of  or t r a d i t i o n a l  more c o n t r o l l e d  others.  than d i d  It i s interesting  a u t h o r i t y feel  s c h o o l i n g groups  by powerful  than  suggest  do t h e M o n t e s s o r i feel  by chance  controlled  findings  concerned that  controlled  to  by  parents.  than feel  either  131  Ih^..-^z§.2L^..~Mi^lD.%.§x.y.L§-.v.s  Ih_t„E_E____^ In  d i s c u s s i n g the A)  a  results,  comparison  clusters  which  conducted B)  a  of  s i x possible-  the  four  comparision  individuals d :i. f f e r e n t  philosophical  were c r e a t e d  i n Chapter  by  Ioading  each on  differing  wi t h i n  each  Factor  I homeschoolers  v.  ii)  Factor  I Montessorians  v  iii)  Factor  III traditional  v.  A  comparison  groupings examine  of  into  results which  whether  groups  factor  decision  i>  C)  the  can  be  made;  or  parent  analysis  as  V.  within  b e I ie fs  comparisons  there  Factor Factor  are  the  ie.  those the  F o t" e x a m p i e s II  homeschoolers  III  Montessorians  Factor  three  of  factors  gr oup -  between  the  group  IV  traditional  superordinate  decision  groups  fall  to  systematic differences  between:  The  i)  homeschooIers  i i)  a l t e r n a t e s c h o o l e r s v.  examination  makes  i t apparent  beliefs  and  comparison schoolers is  of  beliefs  of  that  four each  t h e r e f o r e each with  the  over  regular  traditional  clusters  set  i n the  may  of  hold  data  Comparing  the  three  the  beliefs  clusters  parents  are  schooIers  previous  more  must  homeschooIers)  u n c e r t a i n as  spread the  and  schoolers  group  other.  (Montessori  particularly  schoolers  the  v.  be  than  of  set  of  in  of a l t e r n a t e  regular  schoolers  the a l t e r n a t e  ( I , I I , and  mainly  one  interpreted  beliefs with  chapter  III) while  represented  by  the  factor  arrays  I I I and  IV.  A  Q a L L Q 9.._ t_b.e _ _ _ _ _ _ „ _ „ _ L „ L _ ?  In  order  t o compare homeschoolers  whether  the homeschooIers  sample,  a l l non-aligned  alI  Christian  factions  special  They in  their  and  differ  'learning  goals  one, good  In  for the c h i l d  of  that  their  that  this  I,  while  two  features of a children preference for  teachers  need  ' d i s c o v e r y methods of  life  situations'.  goals  however  the nature  parents  stance  children  and,  presumably,  of the c h i l d .  can be seen  and t h e i r  their  The  of certain  education,  real  about  of the non-aligned  a  as  While  'self-  Iiberationist  t o be moral  and t o be  citizens.  the interviews, the non-aligned  institutionalized to  take  of  the right  the  formal  from  want  II.  of the belief  beliefs  the Christians  Factor  belief  decide  Within  on F a c t o r  their  dramatically in their  actualization'  on  group.  loaded  rejection  and t h e a d o p t i o n  the underlying  the  into  rejection  training,  learning'  loaded  schooling situation,  n o t be r u s h e d  tutoring,  homeschoolers  in their  „ 2 Q _ _ j_i_gned  v . s c h o o l e r s o n e must  a r e a homogeneous  homeschoolers  are similar  traditional should  Q_LL__L_U1_.Y.  t h e view  that  type  non-aligned  s c h o o l i n g than  and  parents  were  s c h o o l i n g might i f the c h i l d  homeschooIers  were more r e j e c t i n g  the Christians, be a c c e p t a b l e ,  were o l d e r .  were b a s i n g  their  who  of  tended  i f i t were  Perhaps rejection  because of  1  OO  J. w » 0  schooling  on  Christian  homeschoolers  grounds, to  with  what  they  degree  degree-  patience; children  have  o f Raymond early  years  children  makes  or s c h o o l i n g  Christian their  child  school.  Both  desirable, himself  one f e e l i n g  projects',  some  her c h i l d  sense  f o r them  i n the future,  felt  that  opportunities t o learn  they  would  on t h e c h i l d ' s  d e s i r e t o go t o that  someone  of h i s strengths able  formal  environment.  depending  need  acceptance  t o consider  interviewed,  might  concerned  the  home e d u c a t i o n i n  and personal  by not b e i n g  being  a need f o r  but premature  time,  To  facing  features of school  her c h i l d  something  the other  oppose,  Most  decision i s  authority. Their  a t some p o i n t  a t some  t o , t o get a better  admitted  claimed  a n d t o what  apologetically,  i t easier  self-esteem,  acknowledge  may b e m i s s i n g  offer  i n school  their  advocates  parents  t o admit  want«-d.  situation  'secular humanist'  homeschooling  commitment,  almost  religious  parents  i f they  to justify  who  on  likely  and acknowledged  t o school  in a  more  a t home  the parent's Moore,  decision  to a l l children.  homeschoolers  i t i s not s c h o o l i n g they  Christian  to  need  noted,  while the  The n o n - a l i g n e d  teach  children  to respect  their  schooling Both  their  were  a near-utopian  their  a s one parent  child's  since  put  from  the- w o r k s  sending  could  system  their  be extended  The C h r i s t i a n  resistance  support  homeschooIers  reflected  reflected  uncertain.  the  could  could  claimed,  this  this  the education  homeschooIing.  b e n e f i t s which  parents,  of  within  the Christians  problems  only  faults  t o compare and f e e l i n g  t o work  on  she might certain  were  'group  n o t be a b l e  s u b j e c t s and  he  134 again  that  some  parents,  while  certain  topics,  While  very  ready  t o send  seemed  open  homeschoolers "lunetic  s u b j e c t s may  about  were  fringe"  be b e s t their  to regard  their  anxious  taught  i n a group.  children  school  religious  t o school  beliefs,  spontaneously  part  of the  that  there  child  of homeschooling  parents.  All  actively  i n f o r m a t i o n about  development tended  and e d u c a t i o n  t o read  perspective  those  were  Ib.§_ £.2__ £_J§or j; a n s j  The  Montessorians  the  difficulty  In  down  information,  Montessori's best  Maria  John  I and  hand,  Christian the non-aligned  Holt.  III representing  threads  Montessori"s  Montessorians  However,  down  liberty  clearly and  work.  concerned  about  and t h e c h i l d ' s  to the child  figures they  of  expressed  for the child  f e a t u r e which  manifested.  a  while  the twin  not t a l k i n g  writing.  about  on F a c t o r s  permeate  about  from  on one  be  m  'respect' of the teacher  intelligence,  wrote  may  E_:__i_2 „Y_.Di§^  interviews, a l lthree  the  is  load  the Christians,  not e x c l u s i v e l y )  in integrating  which  who  enthusiastic  B  discipline  although  authors  (although  homeschoolers  pursued  t o study  the Christian  some b a d e x a m p l e s  homeschoolers  I  as g e n e r a l l y undesirable.  n o t t o be c o n s i d e r e d  and acknowledged  Factor  or  watering  prominently i n  differ  i n how  this  respect  135  For  the  cluster  the  child  I parents,  freedom  parent  i t i s best  treats  the  to  be  child  trifled  to  choose  as  a It  of  manifested  the  public  'bastardized deviation beautiful,  pure  unhappy  to  the  learn  i n an  their  own  which  encouraged  essence, not  speed.  felt  the  their  by  I t was to  For  one,  principles,  for  the  because  someone  the  as  program  felt  it  felt  I parent  i t was  felt  that  onto  the  combine  the  seIf-discipIine.  and  develop  that  she  children  there  felt  This  was  (who  i t was  were  to  on  her  demonstrably felt  return  permit  they to  of  own at  experience  i n Montessori.  and  to  denial  worked that  The  of  artificial  drew  of  Montessori  lack  features of  child  was  a  where e v e r y o n e  classroom  answer  an  parent  positive her  was  a  importance  Montessori to  was  own  enrol  other,  not  like  she  attempting  which  a l l parents  she  because  III  permitted  the  the  structure.  with  and  recognizing the  classroom  i n the  cluster  s t r u c t u r e which  felt  welI  permitting  curriculum  while  cluster  (not  the  knowledge  that  other  school,  what  ungraded  her  of  one  unhappy  competition.  their  progressing  the  public  III parent  prompted  e x i s t e n c e of  experience  on  academic  materials, grafting  destroyed  cluster  motivation,  schools,  The  For  dissatisfied  Montessori  attractive  curriculums)  were  airy-fairy',  'timetable-oriented'  students  them  version'.  from  in the  i s interesting  two  i s d i s p l a y e d by  work.  s e r i o u s seeker  'Montessori*,  'hippie~dippie,  respect  h i s own  represented  with.  in  the  Both,  bright) needed  Montessori  competition.  in  were more  13& The  satisfied  travels  a  attend. shared  Montessorian  good She  many  d i s t a n c e o u t s i d e her  is a  values  listed  very  and  social  own  person  community  which  were  read  benefits to school  who  she  district  values  finds  Montessori  the  to  sense  in the  and  of  Montessori  environment.  AlI  Montessorians  mentioned  specific  Effectiveness about  one  plans  the  long  cluster  fairly one  term  happy  with  of  grouping  confidence  solution She  and  her  with  felt  the  principal  to  that  considered  program also  to  back  III parent  of  to  own  while  giving  school  she  a  could  another at  regular  program  had  proper  the  into  social  that  with  could  be  attitude  and  or  contented suitable  to  the  that  ranked, from  benefit i n her  child.  was  with  a l l been  differed  her  (Waldorf)  The  had  children  teach  but  part-time  10,  she  Montessori  program home.  a  development  adequately  teacher,  i s interesting  Where  assertion  a  teacher,  p s y c h o l o g i s t . They  Montessori  read  training  become a  had  Montessori  Montessori to  alI  Parent  the  university  It  and  III parent  becoming  Montessori.  their  'enrichment'  the  University  pure  dissatisfaction either  took  schooling.  i s i n her h€'lp  children  attending  becoming  Ad I e r i a n ,  cluster  considered  their  above  homeschoolers  school  go  undergraduate  Montessorian,  true  to  goal  homeschooling  the  I parents  courses,  an  only  cluster  two  currently  but  development  Druikers,  p u t t i n g her  The  is  -  -  in child  before  school.  the  approaches  Training  Montessori  while  welI  from lack  Her  interesting. the  regular  Montessorian  i f the  children  teachers while  the  cluster  III Montessorian  children  to  described terms  of  the  her the  structure ranked  C)  were  from  of  the  she  SjchooJ_er sj_  program.  would  schooling  ten  yield  school  in the  as  a  importance  competition  and  discovery  the  teacher  and  the  competition  has  a  significantly  clear and  array in  parents  no  their because both  of  a  a  large degree The  the  not  in  I  the*  Montessorians cluster  admitted  in  unhappy  were  flaw  cluster while  her  Montessorian  children  norv-p I u s s e d ,  to  III  circumstances  homeschool.  IV  be  very  should  learn  to  place of  IV  a  to  of  teach  flexible  for  do  their  best  on  other  love  knowledge  and  and  factor IV,  has  seek  their  in  their  modi f i e d  of  even  role  III,  though III also  outside  broad truth  few  goals and  is  guidance  academically. top  of  modified  array  cluster  i n the  by  in  in the  place  external  for education hand,  The  Parent  goals' the  similar  differ  array  i t highly.  supported  c u r r i c u I urn,  for  factor  need  are  They  role  are  reIigion  education.  children to  which  They  learning.  also rates  "broad  cluster  parents.  than  that  arrays  important  encouraged  Parent  factor  goals  more s o  i t s view  should  to  sending  _Narrow__Schoolingl„y„lB_2_^d„„£b£'£'iiD__.  the  factor  consider  satisfied  program  fact,  herself  nine  of  that  In  somewhat  IV  belief  the  would  quite positively,  I I I and  rejection  The  schooling  Factors of  with  concerned  their  although  which  program.  she  teacher-child-parent relationships.  homeschooIing  parent, under  regular  contentment  Montessorians benefitting  also said  These  items. -  children  improve  society. from  This  arrray  factor  factor  array  legitimate  broad  II  III. -  focus  of  goals  of  goal  of,  what  could  unspoken  goal  of  are  are  factor  array  specific cluster  one  >  and  two  for  the  their  from  of  that  the  being  less  welI  one her  their  three  other  IV  chose two  education  their  parent  should  that  homeschool e r s  that  or  regarded  child's  meetings  they  on  deciding could  directly one  children  number  it  education,  thing should  hold  be  against  proceed.  their  of  about  m  by  than  outright that  that  an  about  H£'. _.._Jb_£'_£__§„Y_Sc h p c ^ e x s  Despite* c l a i m s  or  about  children  felt  the  goals  feature  before  spoke  see  III  informed  attending  that  was  III  either  broader  education,  parents  education  I and  development  scepticism  children  Two  a  cluster  notable  commented  unconvinced  cluster own  most  their  oldest  choice.  The  be  d~etached  the  as  like  self-actualization,  child  The  IV  more  child,  of  actively  a l s o were  freedom  i n how  of  They  Montessori,  contrast,  more s a y  their  child  the  array  looks  arrays  knowledge.  i t may of  the  within  in matters  and  factor  IV  factor  called,  child  result  was  students.  learned  be  g e n e r a l l y enjoyed  i t . They  In  a  outside  residing  the  array  while  in education.  Immersion  permitted  u  They  choosing  against  had  are  unremarkable  French  it.  IV  goals  informed  parents,  separates  i t , factor  loosely  III parents  were good  as  giving  options  education. as  IV  goal?  education,  education  better  cluster  In  i t posits  the  parents  societal  any  she have  variety on  two  of  beliefs?  factors?  notable  for  education  alI  Factor  that  might  and  a  the  Christian  be  or  This  approach  goals  of  the  the  means o f  appreciation  for  array  statements  than  There  however?  were  homeschooling attitudes rejected to-one  the  school  until  the  'real  life'  job  was  believe should  child  the that be  and?  did  Factor  array  several over  was  and  They more  beyond  need be  view  of  on  parents  the  are  Christian a  conservative or  liberal  other  does  as  higher  homeschooIer's  not  guides  view  feel to  ratings to  this  education. liberal  II.  which  were  parents  situation  were  less  favourable  formal  were  to  specialized decided  by  a  one-  children  school  e n t h u s i a s t i c about and  are  education experts.  of  of  delaying  education  N a t u r a l l y , they  favour  favour  more  by  homeschoolers  in  in  preferred  reflecting  surprisingly,  s i x . They  over  education.  should  role  classroom  situation. early  sharing  traditional Not  a  II  pragmatic  statements  education.  the  learning?  their  I is  restrictions  Cluster  only  while  array  loaded  'self-actualization' reject  a  sample  learning?  emphasizes  significantly  teachers  taught  group  abdicate  experiences best  and  education,  traditional  tutoring  starting  of  a  to  in this Factor  direction.  unique  parents  toward  adult  child-directed  I gave  II.  as  tendency  education  means a d u l t s s h o u l d Factor  described  homeschoolers  homeschooIers. to  Factor  in child-directed  greater  competition  homeschoolers  I and  i t s belief  perspective child?  a l l the  to  believe  less or  likely  that  a to  what  Interestingly?  140 they In  also  see  less  need  conclusion, they  education life  should  not  a  did  not  be  the  place,  rejection school  as  one  of  had  and,  three  of  the  experience  of  either  was  very  with  or  the  happy  one's  with  own  homeschooler. children  least  one  were  school  was  'too  young'  or  being  of  a  their  or  children  children whether one  as the  not  homeschooling three  teaching,  one  other  noting  had  schools  been  taken  some' p r o b l e m s  could  deal  individual  mentioning she  had  how  with  was  a  who  planned  teacher,  enjoyed to  the  felt  parents  seeming  academically also  saw  their  sceptical  that  interest  two  in a  'free  of  as  to  that the  in  'playing school'  teach  at  belief  from  being  be  a  that  i s interesting and  some  unhappy  feature of  parents  to  It  the  parent  being  mentioned  them.  their  for becoming  to  tended  indicated she  one  features varied  those  of  precipitously  that  to  Sc h o o l i n g  was  homeschooIers  specific  confirmed  there  choice  parents  a  real  c l i m a t e of  prerequisite  m i nor i t y. and  their  indicating  These  that  schooI ground,  a l l noted  that  in a  n e g a t i v e l y on  homeschooling  spontaneously  that  a  believes that  non-aligned  felt  d e v e I o p m e n t a I Iy s l o w e r  'typical'  having  d i d the  the  who  Christian  intellectual  of  option.  racial  as  remaining  an  The  than  the  'typical', children  group  commented  i s not  a l l four  that  ad van c ed  four  change c o n s t a n t l y .  indicated  All  schooling,  schooling  their  rather  milieu  her  While  their  of  social  I.  to  informally  parents  cluster  evolved,  a  one,  a r d e n t l y as  homeschooling  classroom  as  school.  of  personal  to  with  homeschooIers  although  parent  curriculum  described  Interviews  universal reject  can  take  situation.  for  and  school'.  the  141 Two  of  the  Montessori  training  courses  teacher?  but  believed  that  and  that  homeschoolers  were  less  teachers  sure  parents wanted  also to  parents?  not  to be  might  to  help fact  have  at the  ideas.  also  options  h a v e no  difficulty  parents  were  happy?  noted  that  and  -  which and  also  have.  to  except  that  them  parents  want  to  their  this  in  might  from  protect  selection  were  :  noted  not?  another  option.  for  Montessorians  two  were  homeschooIers  prevented  If they  too  Schooling  some s i m p l y  one  seems o b v i o u s .  the  simply  attributing  than  with  tended  ("Parents  else.  more  were happy  but  indicate  some p a r e n t s  felt  agree  Homeschooling  suggested  parents  to  that's asking  someone  while  worked?  school  i n moving  to  not  teachers  o f f onto  homeschooling  too?  did  or  that  teach  parents  teach  they  to  i f some s c h o o l i n g p a r e n t s  school?  to  a l l homeschoolers  educational  that  compunctions  child  That  couldn't  and  tended  ability  Schooling  a  parents  too  parents  in their  teacher  becoming  wanted  schooling parent.)  Schooling  that  new  they  parents  disapprovingly from  i f they  Schooling  children  children  Montessori  considered  partners with  the  religious  their  teach  darkly  their  the  i t . A l l homeschooling  knowledge be  interested.  sending  felt  i n t e r e s t i n g Iy?  the  briefly  welI-placed.  wondered  to  taken  confidence  traditional  foist  unwilling part  had  special  a  had  confidence.  they  expect  noted  could  i t was  that  had  shouldn't much"  lack  had  against  parents  parents  comment  one  decided  most  to  parents  their  of  they  would  Schooling both  of  whom w e r e s t i l l disgruntled  with  homeschooIing induce II  them  parents  Factor  somewhat  of  the  i t s evolution i n the  parent  to  enamoured  felt  return to  seemed  less  that the  the  public  new  school  school  primary  system.  antagonistic to  I homeschooling  Montessori  the  method  but  system.  No  program  As  would  mentioned  school  system  Factor than  did  parents.  Conclusions The  study  nature  of  has  attempted  parent  to  clarify  some q u e s t i o n s  philosophies, parental  traits  about  and  the  choice  in  schooling.  A)  HSfif-JSbooi-II  Homeschoolers  are  not  been  In  fact,  to  claimed.  Van  that and  Galen's  could  actualization.  which  served  the  child  knowledge  All  be  The  and  a  pedagogues. as  liberal,  held  by  had  to  the  the  child  the  other to  citizen,  has  factors,  One  group  leads  to  an  larger  similar  held  or  beliefs  Rousseauian  self-  homeschoolers,  homeschoolers, a  sometimes  two  Christian  serve and  as  Rogerian  other,  good  belief  yielded  education  sought  homeschoolers  educate  a  and  group  that  mold  moral,  sample  a  view  i n method to  and  this  described  conceptualising a  similar  heterogeneous  ideologues  best  while  as  had  goals  society,  individual  who  ability  parents  to  make  loved  truth.  confidence that  'real  i n the life'  was  itself  of an  to  education.  143 They  were  prone?  begin  formal  child  varying  choose  As  a group?  education  attribute  likely  b e h a v i o u r and  did  influence  some a c t i v i s t s . from  It  was  prefer  not  Although  not  their  of  institution. of  child'?  earlier  follow  preferring  and  to allow  his interests  or  the  feel  influence  responsible  success.  This  i s similar group the  to the  and  has  of  large  of  lives  unhappy  at  had  development  of  fore  belief  and  their that  found  individuals may  chance with  removed  be  school  as  noted  itself  that  well  unsocialized  attempted  to  of powerful  successfully  their  groups  likely  to results  feeling  been  less  although a l l homeschoolers  founded.  a child  children  t o make t h e m s e l v e s  education  and  parents?  homeschoolers they appear  based  education  they espouse  Christian  homeschoolers  schooling?  however?  shared parent  t o be  convinced  cannot  be  a r e more  they are alone  well  their  cluster that  enacted  their  I  the  i n an  conciliatory on  to  the  reading.  the non-aligned  schooling  idea  child  then  to  control  Homeschoolers  about  philosophy  the  do  effect  interacting.  beliefs  this  system?  homeschooling?  informed  life  n e c e s s a r y t o have  deleterious  with  Since  others"  the  significantly  to  academic  their  the educational  "powerful  were  t o chance  more  child's not  rather  freedom  homeschoolers  were  'follow  studies.  occurrences  and  to  later  degrees of  h i s course of  a group?  others  as  to  factor.  144 Considering Biblical  that  and  the  other  religious  homeschoolers.  three  orientation held  however,  i t seems  have- d i f f i c u l t y  encompassing  this  find  i t s views  this  group  group  pr i v a t e  In  will  be  with  wise  common  with  cannot  be  sampled,  to  recognise  in  were  the  i s held,  study.  the  and  the  Christian  public  served  This  small  acting  about  and  individuals  are  impossible,  to  parents  idea  would  Christian  schooling  government  they  share  school  i t seems by  would  likely  that  homeschooling  of  group  Hence,  of  seems w i s e . parent  or  should  be  5j3ome,  in  within  on  school  philosophy to  beliefs  suggested,  with  group  How  widely  that  the  limits  of  also  held  which  they  If  were  these  difficult, The  i f  anathema.  The  itself  the  alienating i t s  tolerance  of  this  the  approach  of  a  homeschoolers  other form  of  cluster  IV  that for  but  public  to  of  not  non-aligned  some s c h o o l e r s  t e n t a t i v e I y,  in  goals  smal I  system.  adapting  without  policy  monitoring  be  seem  views  their  the  w e r e we I I i n f o r m e d . i t would  authorities  some  believe  philosophies  Perhaps,  who  they  hold  homeschoolers  difficulty  the  they  ascertained  schooling  great  educational  authorities.  i n t o the  their  homeschoolers  Traditional  be  group  l u r e them  have  constituents.  these  coherent,  which  while  system.  representative,  already  the  parents,  parents,  of  cannot  although  school  the  views  best  that  school  suspicious  differing,  find  both  of  some s c h o o l i n g  met  suspicion this  that  by  reject  sc hoc Is.  dealing  would  factors strongly  the  signs  of  145 discontent  The  amongst  homeschooIers  categories, favouring  study  religious,  as  goals  their  choice  to  acknowledge  of  s c h o o l i n g than  on  r e l i g i ous  as  The  Montessori  and  on  Factor  on  favouring  pedagogical with  are those  parents III.  The  This  this  trend  strong  and  of  of  moral The  i s best.  into  and  two  pedagogues  development two  beliefs  main  education,  groups  education.  Factor  that  tend  who  the  one other,  and  differ  less  Homeschoolers  seem  t o be  less  recognize base  in who  willing benefits  their  choice  insistence  feature of  by  on  Montessori.  the homeschoolers,  represents trend,  represented  people  the Montessori  emphasized  I with  the parents  t o be  i s represented  parents  this  on  i s the trend  factor  the executive  child  goal  'self-actualization'  i t i s interesting  s e t s of  falI  h o m e s c h o o l i n g and  division  although  both  a  homeschooIers  load  for himself  knowledge  of  to  ideologues  education.  discover  on  appear  as  in goals  in education,  beIiefs.  T h e .J_1on.t e s s o ^  Montessori.  of  problems  B>  with  trends  to VanGalen's  of education  loading  and  'self-actualization'  citizenship  based  in this  similar  predominately  method  parents  who  t h e two  trends  freeing  the c h i l d  by  with  most the  have  Association.  three  parents.  the importance of  respecting the c h i l d Montessori  parents  in to  parents, highest  been  involved  The a c q u i r i n g In i n t e r v i e w s , respect seems feel  for the  t o be  less  a  146 controlled  by  chance  events  controlled  by  chance  than  are  parents,  they  have  traditional affect  their  child's  homeschooIing actively children. children fields. give  They were  They  their  academic  parents.  sought  The  knowledge had  than  do  traditional  homeschooling less and  faith  about  were* w i l l i n g  the  children  what  i n the to  they  in their  best  way own  ability than  had  their  education  after  the  their  psychological  themselves  b e l i e v e d were  do  raise  and  more  to  interviewed  to  educational  inconvenience*  but  Like  outcomes  parents  a l l furthered their  i n preschool  parents.  behavioral  Montessori  parents,  greatly  b e n e f i t s of  to  the  program.  The  Montessori  would  be  would  not  parents  phased  out,  varied  but  the  replace Montessori  Montessori  parents  in this  i n whether agreed for  that  "real  study  they  fall  the  into  as  those  favouring  knowledge  of  a  two  favouring self-actualization acquisition  new  the  primary  program program  Montessorians".  those  the  thought  goal  main c a t e g o r i e s ,  of  education  as  a  goal  and  of  education.  Xb. „ _ „ _ _ i . Y_e,_ Ch  C^  Parents those  who  the  choose  parents  Montessori regular  o o s er_s  who  their  child's  homeschool  program, program  are  less  in public  or  education, whose  likely school  as  children  than to  represented are  parents  in  who  be*lieve* t h e i r  by  the remain lives  in are*  147 governed  by  overall,  they  to  their  raise-  traditional I and  III  options  chance. may  The  have  concluded  the  how  interviewed  to  views  that  actively  that  and  whose  indicated  group  more a c t i v e l y  c h i I dren  parents  and  smalI  they  them.  seriously  option  was  on  how  Those by  factor  considered  about  that  knowledge  represented  information  particular  out  educate  were  had  gathered  sought  suggests  them?  arrays  other but  not  right  for  alternate  forms  of  their  child.  In  this  take  a  sample, more  development sought  parents  active and  role  choose  in educating  behaviour.  information  preschool  who  years,  about were  themselves  It appeared  child  more  that  development  likely  to  seek  about  parents during an  education child  who the  actively child's  alternative  program.  This  suggests  informed quality their  that  consumers to  be  Hirshman's who  leave  view the  deteriorating»  i s correct.  company  Wise  when  educators  It  i s the  they  most  perceive  would  pay  three  of  the  heed  to  complaints.  D  T._„_XL_d.L_L°._§,.l  The  traditional  factors,  one* o n  IV.  A l l parents  with  the  parents Factor rated  traditional  arrayed I,  three  themselves on  themselves  public  school  Factor as  on  I I I and  somewhat  system.  to  the  s i x on  Factor  extremely  It should  be  four  happy  noted  148 that  alI parents  familiar  only  with  generalizations other the to  hand,  same have  had c h i l d r e n that  about  because  'school been  a  variety  seeking parent  on  Cluster child  child  Obviously,  how  schools,  is  there  should  while  h e was  level  III parents  of  ensure  were  Their  a person  of these  wonder  t h e system.  should  must  held that What  three  there  and keep  up w i t h  the*  not  emphasis always best  does i t . of  letting  the  of  t o make t h e  improve  society.  a r e at al I  in the public  i s not u n i n t e r r u p t e d  a II groups  be no r e l i g i o u s  an  both  groups  by p a r e n t s  I  a degree of  not i n favour  were  will  with  i n the child's  were  who  group  as d i d other  may  not i n favour  goals  presumed  active  for schools,  the child  to  experience  indicated  t o be  On t h e  The c l u s t e r  children  t o be e d u c a t e d ,  of the views  be modern  can be  a common  development.  by a d u l t s  they  either.  i t i s little within  that  the adult  i f the goals  harmony  and  no  exposed  a heterogeneous  set of expectations  and t o c r e a t e  representative  child  i s perceived  the child  happy  about  The c l u s t e r  IV p a r e n t s ,  'pushing'  was  and an r e c o g n i t i o n t h a t  and t h a t  decide  of parents. had been  of sharing  This  were  o n e c a n make  differences in belief  school.  a narrow  t o d o what  interest  parents  and  t h e same c h i l d - c e n t r e d o r i e n t a t i o n  I parents.  curriculum,  want  level  of philosophical b e l i e f  indicated  scepticism,  the s a t i s f a c t i o n  at i n spite  o f knowledge  cluster  As a r e s u l t ,  all traditional  arrived  a particular  wide  school-  climate',  within  i n t h e same s c h o o l  do a g r e e  instruction times.  on,  and t h a t  however,  schools  149  Parents  who  actively effort the  a r e 'choosers'  sought  out information  t o be welI  traditional  Traditional control and  parents  likely  others  able  to affect  on o t h e r  of cluster  than  development  made  having  more  matters  to see their  are Montessori lives  than d i d  lives  as being  or homeschooling  being  a r e homeschooling t h e academic  systems?  system?  IV.  likely  to see their  than  the traditional  on c h i l d  a r e more  l e d by c h a n c e  powerful less  informed  parents  a r e more  within  controlled  parents.  or behavioral  They  parents  by  also  feel  outcome- o f t h e - i r  chiIdren.  The  views  common it  common Perhaps is  complaint  would  Holding  be more  together  o n t h e new p r i m a r y  being like  these  lack  the best  reflected  of information.  disparate views  solution?  i n t h e remark  that  would  seem  especially  a r e mixed?  Several  of education difficult  with  parents  a  felt  system  under  III parents  I I I Montessori  wasn't  one  at best.  for the Factor  of the Factor  i fa particular  alternative".  system  Montessori.  schooling philosophy  who n o t e d an  of parents  working  parent  s h e "wanted  150 _Y_.__._S _ „ _ * _ _ _ _ .  Parental child. the  beliefs Factor  basic  learn best  when  of  untrammelled Factor  child  a  learn  I is a  array  hedonist,  but  the  motivation  others.  enjoys,  several  arrays  'goodness'  without  as  have  there  child  the  i s no  set  which  and  his  others.  In  the  other  'imperfect'  getting  which  i s the  or  are  around less  seems her  or  he  of  to  the  presume*  willingness the  child  represents  wiI I  i t , he  learn  must  interesting  be  or  to  learns  restrictions  hand, -  nature  fact,  expectations  I I I , on is  One  belief  from  by  he  certain things  foci.  of the  what  he  forced  to  more  d i ffi cu I t.  The in  second the  focus  belief  belief  that  should  or  wants in are  nature  either  the  child  the  a  that  to  believe  'good'  other  hand,  learn  will  he  one be  doesn't  child can  as  be  child  worth  or  i s to  want  having  that  to  arrays  II  child  Note  wi I I c h o o s e  to  learn  i t .  It  whatever  chosen  by  him  seems however,  -  is  the he  i s what  the  child  and  are  clear  III or  items  that  i t is  only those*  the  Implied  everything  is basically must  that  'good',  certain goals  One  believe  learned.  learn  learning  academic.  the  be  is  learned.  spontaneously need  the  factor  moral  both  must  of  what  will  contrast,  they  of  thinga  curriculum  some t h i n g s  basical ly  only  In  u n i v e r s a l , be  possible  it,  the  learn.  defining  nature  that  that  to  i s the  i f he  'good'  assume  needs  doesn't  difficult  to  and  that  things.  chiId  that  On  the the  to choose  combine  philosophical 'optional' 'perfect' choose  The  curriculum the  child  as  focus  being  Inward  the  looking  goals of  will  educational  the  an  an  role  'imperfect"  of  'imperfect'  there  Cluster  II  religion. children attempt  is a  the  child  curriculum  child  would  'good'  child  child.  which  or  be  with  is  an  to  unable  seeks  to  as  adopt  want  attain  can  concluded i s too was  goals an  to  therefore,  some o f  the  selfimprovement  assume  that  looking  should  defined  by  happiness  a  Any  goals  be  pursued.  their for  their  the "public school since  system  exactly moot  to  how  point.  Iiberal/conservative  Kerlinger suggested  although  the  in society i s a  that  be  d e s i r a b l e norms.  difficult  n e c e s s a r i l y the  i t seems t h a t  dichotomies  be  goals  can  goals.  intellectual  goals  both  improvement  simple. not  will  what  For  i s for  outward  goals  improvement.  those  It  conservative  parents  the  socially  to  These  outward~Iooking  looking  attain  consensus  social  or  Outward  child  curriculum.  education  IV  or  another.  that  Cluster  meet  indeed,  goals  the  define  dichotomy  the  a l l accept  to  be  of  parents  and to  goals  assume  make a  system  assumes  as  and  i s the  'imperfect'  education  and  s i n c e the  inward-looking  actualization of  posit  wi s e I y .  third  seen  p o s i t i o n s which  opposite  these  dichotomies  that of  beliefs  are  being  being can  be  independent  a  a  liberal described  of  one*  In  this  foci;  the  optional for  sample,  the  parental  nature or  of  mandatory;  development  Differences  the  could  be  of  Conservativism  seen  being  another  area.  child; to the  seen  areas. as  beliefs  or  independent  what  whether degree  child to  appeared  or  express  liberalism of  the  the  the  to  differ  curriculum  goals  good  of  themselves i n one  conservativism  around  of the  or  is  education  are  community.  within  £*rea o f  three  these  belief  liberalism  can in  be  153  A  review  the  case  1.  Do  which  The  of  the  study  can  foe  of  factor  philosophies higher  rankings  to  factor  which  which  could  be  any  this  There A  Factor  other which  could  from  conservative  be  trend  a  more  liberal  and  they  gives  Factor  III  Factor  II  not  does  not  moderate gives  moderate  does  philosophy  as  than  appear  they  appear  and to  or higher  to  conservative.  are  conservative trend  The  are  or  liberal  conservative?  categories.  liberal  more  categories  considered  from  of  educational  either  is significantly to  IV  piece  raised.  or  three  considered  educational  appears  moderate  arrays  be  the  into  parental  factor  be  fall  I and  could  how  questions  those  generated  generated  but  that  into  considered  particular  study  I.  trend.  array  from  array  the  liberal,  neatly  items  clarify  philosophies  suggest  the  items  factor  array  are  to  favour in  fall  can  answer  being  study  not  than  The  as  generated  rankings  liberal.  The  this  do  arrays  to  educational  typified  philosophies  questions  f i t together  parental  results  those  research  a  than  to defined factor  moderate  exist  within  this  samp I e .  2.  Do  groups  education their  of  parents  ('decision  endorsement  of  who  groups')  choose  differing  exhibit  educational  methods  systematic  philosophies?  of  differences  in  154 The  results  does not neatly  of  this  differentiate  divided  liberal  homeschoolers methods and Montessori  of  who  with  and  minority  differs and  are  IV  the  a)  are  who  sc h o o l i n g  It  would  share  found  from  Is  less  stance  a  array  systematic  less  in  in  a  of  favour  the  liberal  factor  between of  array  clusters I,  who  are  array  the  II.  majority,  parent  cluster  who I  c h i l d - c e n t r e d , more  factor  factor  s u p p o r t i v e of  there  I,  more  III  social  Rousseauian  views  between  traditional  and  liberal  favouring  difference  I I I . The  IV.  Factor  factor.  It  activist of  goals  childhood.  homeschooling  and  par ent s?  appear  similar  the  that  homeschooling  educational Montessori  liberal  homeschooIing  beliefs  parents  are  educational  experiences  experiences  and  learning  of  Homeschoolers  combination  split  philosophy  Christian  homeschooIers the  I  the  expressed  parent  array  groups.  I and  similarly  favour  educational  homeschoolers  unique  within  factor  homeschoolers, share  the  non-aligned  i s , like  being  a.rra.y  factor  curriculum-oriented  array  non-aligned  prefer  parents  that  between  conservative goals  cluster  parents  indicate  clearly  between  precepts  the  study  and  philsophies. parents  and  expressed more  such  as  They  are  Certainly  in  factor to  learning  from  also  parents  array  I.  do  However,  'informal' real  some c o n t r o l less  can  non-aligned  traditional  favourable  permitting children  experiences.  schooling parents  likely  life  over to  their  believe that  155 teachers decided with in  need  by e x p e r t s .  some c o n t r o l  providing  the  special  nature  e x p e r t i s e or t h a t In g e n e r a l ,  from  the child  education,  however,  of the child  they  the curriculum  favour  informal  and r e j e c t  the role  they  many  and t h e b e s t  share methods  should  be  education of  experts  beliefs  t o teach  about  children  wit h sc hooIer s.  3>  Do t h e d e c i s i o n g r o u p s  g en er a I  There mean  locus of control  Measure However,  homeschooIers  attribute  control  either  Montessori control  4)  on t h e R o t t e r  or i n t h e s c o r e s  Montessori parents  over  events  Do t h e t h r e e  scores  Yes. that their  over  were  their  child's  control  than  values  d e c i s i o n groups  on t h e L e v e n s o n  were  on a  t o chance  parents  behaviour  subscale.  likely  or powerful  or t r a d i t i o n a l  significantly  were  less  less  than  parents.  likely  with  to  others  to  were- t r a d i t i o n a l  differ  in their  of Control  Internal  significantly  events  specific  were  t o mean  Internal-External Locus  t o chance- t h a n  The h o m e s c h o o l e r s  regard  the three  d e c i s i o n groups  on a m e a s u r e  with  i n s t r umen t ?  i s no d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n scores  were  differ  regard  attribute parents.  to their  mean  to child-rearing?  significantly and academic  schooling  parents.  more  likely  success  were  to believe under  156  5)  Is there  control  Yes. the  i s a substantial  Chi I drear ing was s c o r e d  (.38)  Control  scale  suggests  Chance  that  Subscale  specific  explain  their  homeschooIers  appropriate*  place  the  material  schooling  t o I earn  while  Others  Locus  are described  curriculum  the public  system.  Montessori some  l e a r n i n g and o t h e r s  Scale  by  locus of  parents  of school  C h r i s t i a n homeschoo I e r s  in  h i s own  (-.23)  choices?  responsibility  which  a  Locus  a s t h e more g e n e r a l  the institution  of the regular  for the child'  i s also  Subscale  of Control  of adult  'respect  There  t h e Chi I d r e a r i n g  be t h e a b d i c a t i o n school  I--E S c a l e  (-.38).  which  reject  between  indicate internal ity.  to  guide  locus of  the Rotter  (.34).  Powerful  constuct  issues  Non-aligned  secular  between  t h e Chi I d r e a r i n g  sea Ies.  might  scores  Subscale  and t h e Levenson  controI  Are there  and both  so high  correlation  t h e same u n d e r l y i n g  which  and s p e c i f i c  positive correlation  Internal  measure  6)  general  of Control  i n reverse  negative  the Levenson  This  Locus  and t h e L e v e n s o n  substantial  and  between  measures?  There  which  of  a correlation  saw  a n d what  see  children  emphasized  as p e r m i t t i n g  saw a s s e t t i n g  re*ject  they  for guiding  parents  a s an  high  the child  to  standards  and  not  'talking  parents were  who  more  had  array  IV  to  during  'choosers'  expressed  to  the  considered  likely  development were  down'  have  that  on  factor  were  less  sense,  arrays likely  and  educational  alternatives .  In  to  unexpected  less  the  generated.  set  of  beliefs  his  own  learning.  and  but  held  ultimately  doubted IV  was  child  It  conservative  goals  and  children's  in  goaIs  seemed  moderation  methods  child's  able  in or  goals  to  ability  a  but  guide  his  own  examining  the  factor  conservativism  but,  favouring  his  about  four  factor  child  liberal that  III  factor  in  methodology  adults  array  interest  guiding  focused  array Factor  in  were  not,  that  for  i t s view  liberalism,  this  on  II array  the  learning.  arrays  but  child-centred  the  conservative  factor  child  education.  and  views  interesting  were  like  who  favour  about  on  Factor  activism  education,  as  believed  guide  to  liberal,  such  child  Parent  other  focused  goals  to  i t s social  of  two  program  about  information  There  learning.  and  read  likely  parents,  regular  years.  sought  I was  II  liberal  as  supported  or  widely  questions,  array  teaching  affeetive  have  the  Parents  read  Factor  guide  the  III.  have  array  traditional  than  more  encountered.  Factor  which  were  to  research  f i n d i n g s were  arrays  moderate  likely  other  preschool  I and to  Among  information  child's  development  addition  options  sought  their  in  child.  sample,  of  the  158 necessarily  coherant  individuals  may  the  child  liberal the  or  best  without may  but  that  methods  be* s e e n -  the  for to  for  latter  ' i mpr o v e  mean  other  was  on  best  be  aspects  the  former  would  liberal  be  goal  III  factor  the IV  of  as  be  be of  such  as  education  within  liberal  favoured focused  the  or  'inward' on  goals  'self-actualization'  noted  of  knowledge  external  conservative  citizens'  creating  of  coherent  or  acquisition  the  nature  similarly  goal  be  I  that  education  child  may  both  i t was 'good  The  array  the  may  both  described  I.I a n d  of  the  in turn,  on  will  education  I and  focused  arrays  c h i l d r e n who  soc i et y'.  goals,  suggested  about  they  l i e within  however,  III  for  the  to  arrays  could  Factor  i t was  not  Views  These  array  however,  creating  It  conservative  about  example  Factor  what  factor  or  does  use.  education,  child.  goals,  to  community.  leading while  this  systems.  philosophically consistent.  conservative. goals  liberal  conservative  being  larger  be  belief  while  'social' goal  for  c h i l d r e n who  by  of  the would  One o f t h e m o s t the  combining  locus for  the  the diffent sets  the factor loading  responses one  of normative  of control  produced on  awkward p a r t s  groups  array  weights  each  others.  about  the scores  supporting  not i d e a l ,  such  as  o f the*  responses  array,  which  the rankings of items  a central  The a p p r o a c h ,  and p r o v i d e was  factor  on t h e f a c t o r .  a r e t a l k i n g about  with  interviews,  measures?  i n d i v i d u a l s responses  comparison  the  was  for the weighting  individual  and i n a n o t h e r  array,  the Q-sort F o r example,  allow  philosophy  factor  person-oriented  with  of beliefs.  we  study  a n d t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e ANOVA  o f each  instance  of t h i s  of the items according  to  T h e ANOVA o f seperately.  Thus i n  hypothetical of individuals i n  which  evidence  was  t o discuss the  from  but i t i s hoped,  t h e ANOVA a n d  provided  some  en I :i. g h t e n m e n t .  Similarly,  there  was  naturally  occurring  divisions  within  hoped  that  choices,  those  despite  backgrounds  Eiecause  the subjects  were  positions  arranged there  philosophies  at another  a sense  can be  were  t o some  i n an a t t e m p t  this  a t one  factors, at choices.  of the positions  time,  another Again,  i ti s  of parents  from  discerned.  c a n be no r e a l  beyond  discussing  naturally occurring  this,  various  items  some u n g a i n l i n e s s  degree  selected  t o cover  three  generalization  sample.  What  and b e c a u s e t h e philosophical  regarding  c a n be d e m o n s t r a t e d  i s that  certain  belief  different  only  can  schooling?  speak  even  of control  random  choices  since  their  b e made t h a t  locus  and t h a t may  i n d i v i d u a l s who h a v e  share  sample  they  for other  parents  a l l attended  a t t i t u d e toward schools  that  would  however?  be n e c e s s a r y  toward  particular  within  their can  school  and  the district.  A  b e made  a confirmatory  before  values.  t h e same s c h o o l  tentative generalizations could measures?  made  c e r t a i n i d e a l s and  the attitudes of the schooling  reflect  cannot  exist  schooling  Similarly, child's  sets  from t h e  study  any c o n c l u s i o n s  case  using could  a be  drawn.  It  must  be noted  homeschooIing measures.  parents  a  questions own  is  The  than they  not a  s  i n their  about lives  to less  make t h e i r  several about  of the C h r i s t i a n the locus  the fundamentalist  different  them  i t does  e*nough  from  the control  decisions  researchers  of fate?  i s basically  view  chance  different  person.  of subject and t h i s  acquisition  or  that their  meaning t o  The d e s c r i p t i o n o f uninterpretabIe  study  and a t t r i t i o n  was n o e x c e p t i o n .  were  easy  t o find  and none  homeschooIers  were  willing  t o volunteer?  because  Christian  the mainstream  h a s an e n t i r e l y religious  of control  i f one  fellow believer.  problem  subjects  i  asking  actions  them how  l  that  complained  I t seems t h a t  _.„i.t D_?_b i;^k _g a  however?  they  found  the Rotter  dropped  The out.  however  and t h e Levenson  plagues Montessori The two d r o p p e d out  offensive?  one  161 missorted didn't once  have  they  survey the  her  Q-sort,  the  had  she  Montessori  either group into  of of  more  other  one  children  had  in the  Unfortunately, participate.  year  be  to  parents.  i t was  who  did  -  more s y m p a t h e t i c  An  area  the  of  Q-sort.-  By  a  p l e t h o r a of  items,  defended  on  the has  had  these  I,  something hold  better  who  were who  know  were  defined  of  anxious  the  views,  to  parents  cluster  about  going  disqualified.  'regular'  unique  this  their  i f these  I I I or  get  with  number put  into  from  large to  the  would  children  parents  to  child  had  thus  cluster  her  volunteers  who  to  completing  parents  applied  and  difficult  criticism  for t h i s  certain  taxonomies  of  hopefully,  may  them,  get  reliable  difficulty  included a  i s t r e a d i n g on  division  to  finding  interesting  be  defining  one  tried  after  they  IV  parents views they  to of  may  be  'science'.  potential  conservative, is  to  s u b j e c t s were  second  program  cluster  may  they  of  (which  usually  were more s i m i l a r  those  than A  eventually that  rejected  had  children),  i t was  there  she  many  Montessori  Because  was  groups.  that  It would  participate,  One  difficult  older  decided  Finding traditional  two  this  others  traditional  mentioned  p a r e n t s was  who  The  program.  was  the  grade  parents  time.  two  volunteered.  because  participate  and  while  grounds  no  of  some h e u r i s t i c  stances shaky  as  at  i t is a value.  times  i s i n the  liberal,  ground.  educational  doubt  that  study  makeup  moderate  However,  tentative*  can  division  or  there  p h i l o s o p h i e s and arguable,  of  a  be and, 1  It  would  be  teachers axes; of  match  suited see  with  t o Q--sort  several  years  curriculum,  program  such  cluster  I  course  clusters  program  would  t h e same  or optional goals  also  of  nature  education?  be  i s a task  interesting  primary  factors  welI to  program,  family grouping appear  system  a n d what  be.  as mentioned those  change  as Montessori?  parents  i n the previous who  tried  I parents.  simply  Similarly,  by b e i n g  Does h a v i n g  to enroll  t o what  i n contact  i t i n the school  in  with  a  create  parents?  a r e a n d how  remains  a  a s t o how  widespread  on t h e f a c t o r  t o which  philosophy  t h e same  along  of programs  a s an  are cluster  beliefs  the question  expressed degree  whether  vary  of  i n the structure of  o f t h e new  i s implemented  to discover  t o parent  changes  I t would  be o f i n t e r e s t ,  Montessori  degree  Of  after  also  teachers  or outward  examining  structure of the factors  would  Do  the beliefs  t h e mandatory  methodology.  a non-graded  closely  to the introduction  i t indeed  section, the  that  subsequent  assuming  of parents.  and t h e inward  suggests  whether,  t o s e e how  of the child,  the curriculum  beliefs  It  those  the nature  Kerlinger  the  interesting  array  'match*  of t h e school  genera I i s a b Ie  or r e l a t i v e l y  are.  between  Also  parent  c r e a t e s parent  popular  of interest beliefs  these the beliefs  i sthe  and t h e s t a t e d  satisfaction.  163 Summary It  would  seem  from  this  will  n o t be s a t i s f i e d  able  to satisfy  study  with  that  schooling?  the wishes  the i r e of schoolers.  schooling  parents  Previously?  be more  in District  #43?  provision  of Montessori?  program.  Should  facet  of choice  actively of  examining  'good'  the parent and w i l l  system  the parent  from  and e x p e c t e d design  have  school  who  of programs  system  a n d may  learn  expectations  an a c a d e m i c  was  a r e well  believes that  believes that  choice. met  by t h e  and t h e r e g u l a r  parent  spontaneously  different  t o master  of programs  who  have  be  one  informed  beliefs  i n depth  the child i f given  the  of the education  chiIdren.must  curriculum  be  - could  which  but maximizes  opportunity  for parental  j o b i f i t know what  parents  a l l parents want.  -  i s  i n a manner  satisfy  and  bellwethers  of choice  can never  without  that  ape Montessori?  Choosers  Carefully  that  however?  i f they  now  opinion.  may  better  program  system  homeschoolers  seem?  Immersion  disappear.  opportunity  The  French  homeschoolers  i s the school  for choice  development  public  number  satisfied  in child  inherently  the  It does  interested  remembering  to  nor  t h e need  the regular will  non-aligned  of the Christian  provoking  may  true  exposed lead  minimizes  to the  choice.  b u t i t c a n do a  163a  BIBLIOGRAPHY Abraham? M i c h a e l R. ( 1 9 8 2 ) . A D e s c r i p t i v e Instrument For Use i n I n v e s t i g a t :i. n g 9 c i e n c e L a b o r a t o ' r i e s . J o u r n a I o f R e s e a r c h i n Science Teaching 19 ( 2 ) 1 5 5 - 1 6 5 , Ad I e r ? Mor t i trier J., ( 1 9 8 2 ) . The P a i d e i a Proposals Manifesto. New Y o r k : MacMillan.  SylIabus.  New  An E d u c a t i o n a l  < 1 984) . Ihe J__M^ York: MacMillan.  A n d e r s o n ? H o w a r d N.? M a d o n n a ? S t e p h e n J r . ? B a i l e y ? G l e n d a K.? & Wesley? Andrea L. (1987). Further Considerations of the M u I t :i. d i m e n s i o n a I i t y a n d F" a c t o r S t r u c t u r e o f t h e R o 11 e r L... o c u s o f C o n t r o I Sc a l e . P s y c h o I ,oq i c a I R e p o r t s ? 6 0 ? 1 0 5 9 - 1 0 6 2 . At k i n ?  Janet  B a s t i an i ? J o h n  S c h p o I Re I a t i o n s .  with  Beckenham,  Goode?  Kent?  Jackie  G.B.s  Barman? J e a n (1984). Gr__w_j_g_JJ^ Vancouver: U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia B e a 11 i e ? N i c h o l a s F a I mer P r e s s . Bennett? Harold Random H o u s e . Brenner? Research Press.  (1985).  (1972).  Pr o f e s s i o n a I  No M o r e  Carter? British  Press.  Parents.  Pub I i c S c h o o l .  Londons  New  Th e  York:  Va(iDDU_^  pp  (M a r c: h 18 ? 1988) . P u b I :i. c S c h o o I s p r e f e r r e d m i n i s t r y annual report  1-2.  J o h n D. ( 1 9 8 6 ) . L E R T A P U s e r s M a n u a l . Columbia? F a c u I t y o f E d u c a t i o n .  Cog an ? S u s a n a ( 1 9 7 9 ) . Pj_ter^^ Schoolings The Coquitlam E x p e r i e n c e . S e r v i c e No. ED 1 7 3 9 7 3 ) . Common? Growing  Helm.  Mi c h a e I ? Br own ? J e n n i f e r ? C a r t e r ? Davi d (1985) . The Interviews Uses and Approaches. New Y o r k s Academic  B u I a ? F r a n c e s & A r ms t r o n g ? J o h n G e t Low M a r k s : P r i v a t e e d u c a t i o n says.  Croom  (1.988).  (ERIC  University of  Document  Research  Ron W. &: MacMul I en ? M a r i l y n (.1.986). Home S c h o o l i n g Move-ment» E d u c a t i on C a n a d a 2 6 ( 2 ) 4 - 7 .  Col f a x , D a v i d & M i c k i Y o r k : Warner Books.  (1988) .  Home sc: h o o I i n q  forExcellence.  A  New  163b  Cronbach. L. J . ( 1 9 5 3 ) . R e s e a r c h T o o l . I n H. 0. R e s e a r c h (pp. 376-388).  The C o r r e l a t i o n Between P e r s o n s as liowrer (Ed.)? Psyc hot her apy; Theory New York. Ronald Press.  a and  C uI I i n g f o r d C e d r i c ( 1 9 8 4 ) . Th e B a t t i e f o r t h e S c h o o I s s a11 i t u d e s o f p a r e n t s and t e a c h e r s t o w a r d s e d u c a t i o n . E d u c a t i o n a I S t u.d i e s 10, 2, 113-119. de Bruyn? R o b e r t L „ (1986).. R el a t i n q t o P a r e n t s Manhatten, Kansas. The M a s t e r T e a c h e r Inc.  P r o f e s s i o n a I I y.  E r i c k s o n ? D o n a I d A„ ( 1 9 7 9 ) . C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a n d r eI a t i on s h i p s i n p u b l i c and i n d e p e n d e n t s c h o o l s ; an i n t e r i m r e p o r t o f t h e " B a s e I i n e S u r v e y " , an a s p e c t o f COFIS; a study of consequences o f f u n d i n g i nd e p e n d en t s c h o o I s • Vancouver, B.C.; Ed u c a t i o n a I R e s e £i r c h I n s t i t u t e o f B. C „ E r I a u t • G. Roy (1979). A S u r v e y o f P u b l i c O p i n i o n on S e l e c t e d E d u c a t i q n a I Issue- i n S c h o o l D i s t r i c t 43? C og ui t j am. Unpub I i s h ed ma s t e r s t h e s i s . S i m o n F" r a s e r U n i v e r s i t y ? B u r n a b y ? B.C. i  F a n t i n i ? M a r i o D. (1973). S i mon and Shust er .  Public  Schools  i  of  i  i  ii  Choice.  New  Y o r k;  G a I e.j s ? I r ni a a n d P e a s e ? D a m a r i s ( 1 9 8 6 ) . P ax r e n t i n g B e l i e f s L o c u s o f C o n t r o I 0 r i e n t a t i on . J o u r n a I o f P s y c h p l_og_y Ij2j0 ( 5) 510. " ~ ~ "  and 501 -  G a l e n ? A n d r e s a n d N e l s o n ? L a r r y R i c h a r d (1986),, LERTAP T e s t ? S u r v e y and D a t a A n a l y s i s f o r M i c r o c o m p u t e r s T e c h n i c a l ManuaI [ C o m p u t e r P r o g r a m M a n u a l II. North Vancouver? B.C.. .Ditactics S e r v i c es. Goodman? S h e r r i H o p e a n d W a t e r s ? L . K. (1987). Convergent V a l i d i t y of F i v e Locus of Control S c a l e s . E d u c a t i on a n d P s y c h o I o q i c a I Meaxsur e m e n t 47 7 4 3 - 7 4 7 . G o o d n ow ? J a c q u e I i n e J . ( 1 9 8 5 ) . Change and V a r i a t i o n i n I d e a s A b o u t C h i I d h o o d a n d P a r e n t i n g,, I n I r v i n g E . S i g a I ( E d . ) ? P a r e n t a l Be 1i e f S y s t ems; The P s y c h o l o g i c a l C o n s e q u e n c e s f o r C h i l d r e n (pp. 235-270). Hi I I s d a l e ? N.J.s ErIbaum. Ha i n s t o c k ? E I i z ab e t h ( 1 9 7 8 ) . The E s s e n t i a l M o n t e s s o r i : An I n t r Q d u c t i on t o t h e Woman ? T h e W r i t i n g s ? t h e M e t h o d a n d t h e Movement. Sc a r b o r o u g h ? 0 n t a r i o: New A m e r i c a n L i b r ar y o f Canad a. H i r s c h m a n ? A l b e r t 0. (1.970). E x i t ; V o i c e a n d L a y a I t y : R e s p on s e s t o D e c l i n e i n F i r m s ? O r g a n i z a t i o n s and S t a t e s . Cambridge? Mass.: Har v a r d U n i v e r s:i. t y F'r e s s . Holt?  John  (1.976).  I nst ead  o f E d u c a t i o n.  H o i t ? John ( 1 9 8 1 ) . T e a c h Your New Y o r k s, De I a c o r t e P r e s s .  Owns  A  New  Hopeful  York; Path  Del I .  for Education.  163c  I g n a s , E d w a r d 2< C o r s i n i ? R a y mon d ( ' . 1.979) „ A 1 1 e r n a t i v e E d u c a t i o n a I S y s t e m s . I t a s c a ? II l i n o i s : F. E. P e a c o c k . Illich? Row.  Ivan  (1971).  DesenooI i nq  Jowett, Benjamin (trans. ) N e w Y o r k s R a n d o rn H o u s e . Ker l i n g e r ? (2nd e d . ) .  (1.943).  F r e d N. ( 1 . 9 7 3 ) . New Y o r ks HoIt (1984)  S o c i e t y„  New  York:  T h e PoI i t i c s  Harper  o f Ar:i.stot Ie.  Foundations of B e h a v i o u r a l Rinehar t and Winston. L i b e r a I i sm  Nj§t u r ^ ^ ErIbaum.  and  Research  a n d C o n s e r v a t i v i sm s The. . Hillsdale? N.J. 5  Ker l i n g e r ? F r e d & Kaya? E s i n (1.970). The C o n s t r u c t i o n and Factor A n a l y t i c V a l i d a t i o n o f S c a l e s t o M e a s u r e At t i t ud e s Towar d Educat ion. I n G e n e F . S u m m e r s ( E d . ) A t t : i . t u d e M e a s u r ement,? Chicago; Rand McNally. K i I gore? Peter ( 1 9 8 7 ) . P r o f i l e o f F a m i l i e s Who H o m e S c h o o l i n M a i n e . ( E R I C D o c u m e n t R e p r o d u c t i o n S e r v i c e No. ED 2 9 5 2 8 0 ) . Krenter? L y a ( 1 9 8 5 ) . Locus o f Control? A t t i t u d e s toward Education and T e a c h i n g Behaviours Scandinavian Journal of Educational  E^micjil  27,  1?  1-11.  Lai? Calvin (3.986). UBC_i3Pi_3_Xi _=_L3jLi_^^ S c i e n c ej5... ...Ex t ^ P r o g r a m M a n u a l "J. V a n c o u v e r B . C . : University Computing Centre. z  CComput er of British Columbia  L e ? Ch i n h ( 1 9 8 3 ) » V a n e o u v e r ? B.C.; Centre.  F a c t o r A n a I y s i s IC o m p u t e r F' r o g r a rn M a n u a l II U n i v e r s i t y o f Br i t i s h Co Iumbi a Comput i ng  Lefcourt?  M.  Herbert  :  (Ed.).  (1981)„  C_2_J_r^  Research  with t h e Locus of New Y o r k ; Academic  Press. L e t ' s Talk About S c h o o l s of B r i t i s h C o Iumb i a .  (1985).  Mi n i s t r y o f E d u c a t i o n ?  P r o v :i. n c e  Levenson? Hanna (1981). Internality? Powerful Others and Chance. I n H e r b e r t M. L e f c o u r t ( E d . ) R _ _ - s e a r , c h . . ^ QoQ^^ (pp.1.5-59) . New Y o r k s Academic P r e s s . L i n e s ? P a t r i c i a M. ( 1 9 8 6 ) . Home I n s t r u c t i o n s An O v e r v i e w . Pol i c y I s s u e s . Appal a c h i a E d u c a t i o n a l L a b o r a t o r y . (EIRIC D o c u m e n t R e p r o d u c t i o n S e r v i c e No. ED 2 9 6 4 5 3 ) .  163d Ma h e n ,  Bern i c e M a r i e  & Ware?,  Br en d a  Joyce  (.1987).  Home  Edy_.:§M and P u b l i c Schooling.  S c h o o l S u p e r i n t e n d e n t s T o w a r d t h e B e n e f i t s o f Home C E R I C D o c u m e n t R e p r o d u c t i o n S e r v i c e IMo. ED 2 8 6 6 2 4 ) .  M a r s h , H e r b e r t W. & R i c h a r d s G a r r y E . C 1 9 8 7 ) . T h e Mul t i d i m e n s i o n a l i t y o f t h e R o t t e r I---E S c a l e a n d i t s H i g h e r - o r d e r S t r uc t u r e: An Ap p I i c a t i on o f Con f i r mat o r y Fac: t o r An a I y s i s . M u l t i v a r i a t e B e h a v i o u r a l R e s e a r c h 22, 39-69. Mc I r t i s h , Rotter's 274.  Mei Van ( 1 9 8 7 ) . Mu I t i d i men s i on a I i t y o f S c a l e . P s y c h o l o q i c a I Repor t 61 __ 2 7 3 -  H. T h o m a s & L e e , Locus of Control  M c M i l l a n , B a r b a r a D. G/C/T/ 4 1 , 55-56.  (1985).  Home E d u c a t i o n  Mei g h a n , Ro I a n d ( 1 9 8 4 a ) ,. Home-Based the attempt t o m a i n t a i n a mythology. 273-285.  Education.  forGifted  Children,  a n d E d u c a t :i. on A u t n o r i t i e s s Eld uc a t i on a I S t u d i e s 10. 3,  (1984b). P o I i t i c a I C o n s c i o u s n e s s E d u c a t i o n a I . R e v i ew. 36? 2? 1 6 5 - 1 7 3 .  a n d H o me - b a s e d  C1986) . A ..SJOCJJD Iss^^^mMS^Mon.' Rei n h a r t ? W i n s t o n : London.  Ho I t ?  M e i g h a n ? R o l a n d & Brown? C h r i s t i n e ( 1 9 8 0 ) . Locations of Learning and I d e o l o g i e s o f E d u c a t i o n ; Some I s s u e s R a i s e d b y a S t u d y o f "Education Otherwise". In Len Barton? Roland Meighan and S t e v e n Walker (Ed . ) . Sc h o o ^ i n.g ._.Xd e p . Susse x? England: T h e F a I mer P r e s s . 1  M i n i s t e r y o f E d u c a t ion (1987). J u l y 1 1 9 8 6 t o J u n e 30? 1 9 8 7 . o f B.C.  Annual Ministry  report forthe Period of o f Ed uc a t i o n . P r o v i nc e  M i n i s t r y o f E d u c a t i o n a n d B.C. C o u n c i l for Leadership i n E d u •:: a t i o n a I Ad m i n i s t r a t i o n ( 1 9 8 2 ) „ Ex p I o r i n q P a r en t a I Involvement i n Education. M i n i s t r y of Educations Provinee of B.C. M i n i t ab, I n c . ( 1 9 8 5 ) . j_ij_ijt_^^ 5.1. CComputer P r o g r a m M a n u a l ] .  S t a t e Col l e g e ,  iiiMiL^^ PA.  Montessori? Maria (1967). The D i s c o v e r y o f t h e C h i l d . Costelloe Trans.). New Y o r k : B a l l a n t i n e B o o k s . Mo ore, Young  Raymon d S. ( 1 9 7 9 ) . University Press.  School  Can Wait„  Myrdal? Gunnar (1944). An_jAm^^ a n d M o d e r n D e m o c r a c y V o l . 1. New Y o r k :  Pr o v o ?  Harper  (M. J o s e p h  Utah:  Br i g h am  and B r o t h e r .  163e  N a u l t , R i c h a r d L. U c h i t e l l e , Susan (1982). School Choice i n t h e P u b I i c S e c t o r s a C a s e S t ud y i n P a r e n t a I D e c i s i o n l i a k i n g . In M a n l e y - C a s i m i r , Michael E. (Ed.) F a m i i ^ ^ I s s u e s a n d D i I emmas ( p p . 8 5 - 9 8 ) . Torontos D.C. H e a t h . N e i l I, A. S. ( i 9 6 0 ) . Rear ing.. New Y o r k :  SjjrQm^^ Hart.  A_Ji§jdi^  N e i s s e r , U. ( 1 9 7 9 ) . The Concept o f I n t e l l i g e n c e . I n R. J . S t e r n b e r g a n d D. K. D e t t e r m a n ( e d s ) Human Inte*! I i g e n c e s P e r s p e c t i v e s o n i t s T h e o r y a n d M e a s u r e m e n t ( p p . 1 7 9 - 1 8 8 ) . Nor wood, N.J.s Ablex. Nelson, E r i k (1986). Hom_tJ5c±L^ ( E R I C D o c u m e n t R e s e a r c h S e r v i c e No. ED 2 8 2 3 4 8 ) Nunnally, Hi I I .  Turn C.  (1967).  Psychornetr i c Theory  0 ' N e i I I , Wi I I i am F . ( 1 9 8 1 ) . Educ a t i o n Expressions of Educational Philosophy. G o o d y e a r P u b I i s h i n g.  New  York:  McGraw-  I d e o I o g l e s s C o n t empor y Santa Monica, C a l i f o r n i a :  P a g e , F r e d M. J r . , P a g e , J a n e A. & T r e m b l e , J o h n n y W. (1987). P a r e n t ' s P r i o r i t i e s f o r E d u c a t i n g T h e i r C h i l d r e n . CI e a r i n q H o u s e 60, 270-272. Phares, E. J e r r y (1976). Locus of Control M o r r i s t o w n , N. J . s G e n e r a l L e a r n i n g P r e s s .  i n Personality.  Pitman, Mary Anne ( 1 9 8 7 ) . C o m p u l s o r y E d u c a t i o n Schoolings Truancy or Prophecy? §duea_^^ 2, 2 8 0 - 2 8 9 . Power,  Edward  J.,  (1982).  Philosophy  a n d Home 19,  of Educations  £JlL!_2_^ C I i f f s , N.J.s P r e n t i ce-HaI I .  Sty_dj^^ E  " 9 ewood 1  P r a t be, R i c h a r d ( 1 9 7 1 ) . Cont.ej]_Q„^^ T o r on t o s I n t e x t E d uc a t i on a I Pub I i s h e r s . Priesnitz, Ontario.  Wendy  (1987).  School  Free.  Village  Books:  Unionville,  Ray, A l i c e A l l e n (Ed.). (1982). SAj3JJjier__s_ G u i de__J_a_5J__s CComputer M a n u a l ] S t a t i s t i c a l A n a l y s i s S y s t e m , SAS I n s t i t u t e , G a r y , N.C. Ray,  Brian  D.  (1986).  S_9JlYer_^^ Document R e s e a r c h  AJ_oirn^^ <: E  Service  Number  ED 2 7 8 4 8 9 )  R  1 c  163f  Reywid, Mary Anne ( 1 9 8 5 ) . Family Choice Arrangements i n Public SchooIs: A Review of t h e Literature„ Review o f E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h 55, ( 4 ) , 435-67.  to  Choose  (ERIC  (1987). Pjy_ej_j_!_^ Document R e s e a r c h S e r v i c e  No. ED 2 9 0 2 3 7 )  (1987). The Dynamics o f S u c c e s s and P u b l i c S c h o o l s o f C h o i c e , E q u i t y a n d C h o i c e 4, 1, 3 5 - 4 1 ( F r o m E R I C C U E A b s t r a c t s 1987, E J 366929) R i c h a r d s , J a m e s M. J r . ( 1 9 8 3 ) . V a l i d i t y o f L o c u s o f C o n t r o l and Self-Esteem Measures i n a National L o n g i t u d i n a l Study. Education §nd.J~.|L^^ 43 897-905 Rosch,  Eleanor  (1975).  Cognitive  Representation of  C a t e g o r i es.- JJ2!_L!1^^ (3) 192-203.  & B. L l o y d Hi I I s d a l e ,  Semantic  |3ener__L  (1978). P r i n c i p l e s (Eds.) _J__gj__y_3^^ N . J . : LEA.  of Categorisation. In E. Rosch (pp. 27-47).  R o s c h ? E I e a n o r , Mer v i s , C a r o I y n B., G r a y , Wayne D., J o h n s o n , D a v i d M. ?< B o y e s - B r a e m , P e n n y (1.976). B a s i c O b j e c t s i n N a t u r a l Categories. C o q n i t i v e P s y c h o Ioqy„ 8, 3 8 2 - 4 3 9 Rutter, !Ltl££^  Michael  (1979). 1 5 0 0 0 H o u r s : S e c on d a r y S c h o o I s L o n d o n : Open B o o k s .  a n d Th e i r  S a m a r o f f , A r n o I d * J. 3< F e i I , L e s I i e A. ( 1 9 8 5 ) . par ent a I Concepts o f D e v e Iop m e n t . I n I r v i n g E . S i g e l (Ed.)„ Parental Belief Sj^stemsj. _D_.e_J__sy^ (pp. 83105). H i l l s d a l e , N.J.s E r I b aum. S c h a e f e r , E a r l S. ?< E d g e r t o n , Mar i a n n a (1.985). P a r e n t a n d C h i l d C o r r e l a t e s o f P a r e n t a l M o d e r n i t y . In I r v i n g E. S i g e l (Ed.,). __-r_£_l£^ Chi Idren (pp.287-315)„  I!l-_JE_^ Hi I I s d a l e , N.J.:  ErIbaum.  S e g a l , M a r i l y n (1985). A Study o f Maternal B e l i e f s and V a l u e s W i t h i n t h e C o n t e x t o f An I n t e r v e n t i o n P r o g r a m . In I r v i n g E . S i g e l (Ed. ). Paj_enrta^^ J J _ e _ P s j _ _ c h o i p g i c.aJ._.Cj_ns for C h i l d r e n ( p p . 271.-286). H i l l s d a l e , N.J. s E r I baum. S i g e l , I r v i n g E., (1985) A C o n c e p t u a l I r v i n g E. S i g e l (Ed. ) . Par__Qt^ E s Y j 2 h 9 i o g i c aJ_C_^ N.J„: ErIbaum.  Analysis  o f B e l i e f s . In Jhe (pp . 3 4 5 - 3 7 1 ) . H i II s d a I e,  SuI I i v a n , B a r r y M„ Q.C. ( 1 9 8 8 ) . A L e g a c y f o r L e a r n e r s : .The R e p o r t o f t h e Royal Commission on E d u c a t i o n . Province of British Co I u m b i a .  163g  S t r a t t o n ? P e t e r C1388). P a r e n t ' s C o n e e p t u a I i z a t i on o f C h i I d r e n as t h e O r g a n i z e r o f C u l t u r a l S t r u c t u r e d Environments, In J a a n V a I s i n e r CEd. ) , CJ_LL_i_JE>^^ §J2__ilJ2QJMOtiL5 Parentis (Vol . 1 ) . N o r w o o d ? .N.J.s AbI e x . Swic.k, K e v i n J.& G r a v e s , S t e p h e n B, ( 1 9 8 6 ) . Locus of Control I n t e r p e r s o n a l S u p p o r t a s R e l a t e d t o P a r e n t i n g , C h i l_dhood E0ii!:L§tiP^ § 3 , 1, 4 1 - 4 4 , 4 6 - 5 0 . Van G a l e n , J a n e ( 1 9 8 7 ) . Home S c h o o l i n g i n C o n t e x t R e s e a r c h S e r v i c e No, ED 2 8 4 " § 2 4 ) ." (1988) Becoming 23  Home S c h o o l e r s .  (ERIC  Ur b an  and  Document  Ed uc a t i o n  CI) 89-106.  Wade, T h e o d o r e E. & o t h e r s , ( 1 9 8 6 ) , The_JHc_^ P a r e n t s Who T e a c h T h e i r Own C h i l d r e n . Auburn, Gaz e I I e P u b I i c a t i o n s „  CaI i f o r n i a s  Waters, I . K., P o p o v i c h , P a u l a M., & M a r t e l l i , T h e r e s a A. (1987). Congruent V a l i d i t y o f t h e Personal R e a c t i o n S c a l e . P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s §J__ p . 3 1 4 „ W e i t z , J o h n R., R o t h b a u m , F r e d S t a n d i n g Out a n d S t a n d i n g Ins America and Japan. A j r _ t r j _ _ a ^ ^  M.?& B l a c k b u r n , T h o m a s C. ( 1 9 8 4 ) . The P s y c h o l o g y o f C o n t r o l i n 19, ( 9 ) , 9 5 5 - 9 6 9 . .  W i l l i a m s , D a v i d D. e t a l C 1 9 8 4 ) . U|id_er_it^^ C a s e S t u c _ . e s o f Home S c h o o l s ( E R I C D o c u m e n t R e s e a r c h ED 2 4 4 3 9 2 )  Service  No.  Wilson, J . Donald C1981), R e l i g i o n and Educations The Other Side of Pluralism. In W i l s o n , J . D o n a l d CEd,)„ Canadian E d u c a t i o n , i n t h e 1980's, Calgary: D e t s e I :i. g E n t e r p r i s e s . Y i n ? R o b e r t K. ( 1 9 8 4 ) . Case Study Researchs Design B e v e r l e y H i I Is? C a l i f o r n i a : Sage P u b l i c a t i o n s .  and Methods.  164 APPENDI X CONTACTS  WITH  I PARENTS  PILOT SIGN  I  would  be wiI l i n g  completing for body  to brief  calibrating  SHEET  to participate in this questionnaires,  the t e s t s only  of research.  confidential  UP  I understand  and t h a t  I am  free  research  I understand  and a r e not p a r t that  project  the results are  of the actual  the information  t o withdraw  by  at any  i s strictly  time.  Dear  T h a n k y o u f o r a g r e e i n g t o h e l p me w i t h my ' p i l o t run' of these questionnaires. You w i l l r e c e i v e two q u e s t i o n n a i r e s ? the Rotter I n t e r n a I - E x t e r n a l L o c u s o f C o n t r o l m e a s u r e a n d my newly-designed measure? t h e C h i l d - R e a r i n g L o c u s o f C o n t r o l Measure. You w i l l be r e c e i v i n g t h e f i r s t o f t h e two q u e s t i o n n a i r e s t o d a y ? and the s e c o n d i n a b o u t one week's t i m e . The i n f o r m a t i o n g a t h e r e d w i l l be u s e d t o h e l p w i t h t h e d e s i g n and further refinement of the " C h i l d - R e a r i n g Locus of C o n t r o l " questionnaire . Your r e s p o n s e s w i l l remain e n t i r e l y c o n f i d e n t i a l ? w i l l n o t be i n t e r p r e t e d i n d i v i d u a l l y i n any manner a n d wiI I b e u s e d s o l e l y f o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f d e s i g n i n g and improving the questionnaire. B o t h t e s t s wiI I h a v e t h e s a m e number on t h e m . Y o u r name wiI I b e a t t a c h e d on a r e m o v a b l e t a g . P l e a s e remove the t a g with your name on i t b e f o r e r e t u r n i n g t h e s h e e t . The s i g n — u p l i s t s wiI I b e d e s t r o y e d when t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s h a v e b e e n s e n t o u t a n d returned and no l i s t o f names o r r e c o r d o f w h i c h p e r s o n a n s w e r e d w h i c h q u e s t i o n n a i r e w i l l be kept. It i s not n e c e s s a r y t o s i g n a consent form as c o m p l e t i n g q u e s t i o n n a i r e s i s c o n s i d e r e d t o be 'consent'. Thank  you  very  much  for  your  help  Si  with  this  part  ncereIy?  Heather  Wingert.  of  my  the  project.  166  29  May  1989  Dear  A t t a c h e d y o u wiI I f i n d t h e s e c o n d f i l l e d out. It i s important that quest i o n n a i r e s . Thank  you  again  for  volunteering  o f t h e two q u e s t i o n n a i r e s the__same_gerson f i l l s out  as  subjects.  Yours  truIy,  t o be both  June,  1989  Dear T h e c o m m i t t e e o v e r s e e i n g my r e s e a r c h h a s r e q u e s t e d t h a t I c o r r e l a t e my Ch i I d ~-r e a r i n g L o c u s o f C o n t r o I m e a s u r e w i t h a se> w e l I - e s t a b I i s h e d measure. I would l i k e t o ask you, t h e r e f o r e c o m p l e t e t h i s t h i r d q u e s t i o n n a i r e ( T h e L e v e n s o n I , P, a n d C Scale). T h i s s c a l e i s v e r y b r i e f and s h o u l d t a k e about five minutes to complete. Again, your r e s p o n s e s w i l l remain completely confidential and a r e t o be u s e d s o l e l y f o r t h e development of the C h i l d - r e a r i n g Locus of Control Scale. I t h a n k y o u v e r y much f o r y o u r a p p r e c i a t e your c o o p e r a t i o n as arnount o f t i m e a n d e f f o r t .  p a t i e n c e and i t wiI I s a v e  a s s u r e you t h a t I me a s u b s t a n t i a l  Si ncerely,  Heather  Wingert.  168  HELP!  I f y o u h a v e a p r e s c h o o l c h i l d i n M o n t e s s o r i and no c h i l d r e n i n the p r i m a r y M o n t e s s o r i program, I would l i k e t o ask you t o v o l u n t e e r t o s o r t o u t a b o u t 100 s t a t e m e n t s a b o u t e d u c a t i o n t h i s weekend. This i s for a p i l o t project f o r my M a s t e r ' s t h € * s i s . It wiI I t a k e y o u a b o u t a h a I f an h o u r o r s o a n d i s q u i t e i n t e r e s t i n g t o do. It i s c o m p l e t e l y v o l u n t a r y of c o u r s e ( you can drop out i f y o u d o n ' t h a v e t i m e or i t ' s b o r i n g ) and i s c o n f i d e n t i a l . Thanks!!! Heather Wingert (Josh's mom) PM c l a s s - S u z e t t e a n d K r i s t i n a ' s  side.  170  APPENDIX RECRUITING  0F  r  II SUBJECTS  SURVEY I n c o l l a b o r a t i o n w i t h D r . R o b e r t C o n r y , Ph.D. of the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I am c o n d u c t i n g o f s t u d y o f e d u c a t i o n a l b e l i e f s o f p a r e n t s i n M o n t e s s o r i and R e g u l a r Progams and t h o s e o f homesc h o o I e r s. If you ares 1) a p a r e n t w i t h a c h i l d a t H a r b o u r v i e w S c h o o l 2 ) h a v e a c h i l d i n G r a d e 1, 2, o r 3 I would l i k e t o t a l k t o you. This your All  w o u l d t a k e a b o u t 2 h o u r s o f y o u r t i m e and home w h e n e v e r i t i s c o n v e n i e n t w i t h you. i n f o r mat i on  is strictly  I could  come  c on f i d e n t i a I „  I f you a r e i n t e r e s t e d i n p a r t i c i p a t i n g or w o u l d l i k e more i n f o r m a t i o n , p l e a s e l e a v e y o u r name a n d p h o n e number b e l o w t a k e a p h o n e number a n d c a l I me f o r m o r e i n f o r m a t i o n . Name  Address or P h o n e Number  to  I would be willing to participate  or  I would like more i n f o r m a t i o n  171  19  ApriI  1989  Dear  I  would  notice and  very  much  i n your  appreciate  newsletter.  i t i f you could I have  she has g r a c i o u s l y agreed  spoken  t o post  run the following  t o Carolynne  some n o t i c e s  Fitzgerald  at the  c I a s s r ooms.  Notice  WANTED: I  am  w r i t i n g b y M.A.  "Choices: I  MONTESSORI  hope  Why  traditional their  I would answer  their  the role  require a  statements  about  Al I i n f o r m a t i o n  (EducationaI  Choose  school)  about  2 hours  Parents  regarding  philosophies  on  and  the reasons  for  and a t t i t u d e s  education.  o f your  questionaires?  education  U.B.C)  A l t e r n a t i v e s " and  Montessori  parents  in  SUBJECTS  Psychology?  Educational  educational  of parents  few b r i e f  AS R E S E A R C H  home s c h o o l e r s ?  (regular  choices?  toward  Thesis  Parents  to interview  PARENTS  and would  i n d i c a t e your  and t e l l  wiI I be s t r i c t l y  time  me  why  views  you chose  confidential  like  you t o  on  various  Montessori.  a n d y o u wiI I b e  1.75  interview looking and  will  confidential  how  I realize-  i t wiI I b e  too,  as  and  Thank  contact  you  they  The  can  i t would  most  i t will are  convenient  they  i f I thought to  of.  for homeschooIers?  because  sure  consist  me  take  I'm  any  a  going  possible  withdraw get  only  busy. as  important  thing couple to  f o r them  time.  i s that  t r y to and  ( I ' d do  v o l u n t e e r s ) . And,  of  hours make  that i t ' s handsprings  of  course,  me.  again. Si ncereIy,  Heat her  I'm  (Wi n g e r t )  180 how i t has i n f l u e n c e d their e d u c a t i on.  decisions regarding  their  child's  Thank y o u a g a i n f o r your c o o p e r a t i o n . I hope y o u w i l l find this an i n t e r e s t i n g s t u d y i n w h i c h t o p a r t i c i p a t e . The next page i s a consent form, i n d i c a t i n g t h a t y o u have r e a d t h i s , u n d e r s t a n d t h e n a t u r e o f t h e p r o j e c t , a r e aware t h a t y o u c a n withdraw a t any time and t h a t t h e i n f o r m a t i o n i s c o n f i d e n t i a l and t h a t your consent i s freely given. Si ncereIy, CONSENT FORM. P l e a s e s i g n t h i s copy and r e t u r n i t with t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s and Q—sort cards. P l e a s e keep t h e a t t a c h e d l e t t e r and t h e second copy o f t h e consent form f o r p e r s o n a l r e c o r d s . Thank y o u .  I have agreed t o v o l u n t e e r f o r t h e study "A C o m p a r i s o n E d u c a t i o n a l B e l i e f s o f P a r e n t s who H a v e C h o s e n Home S c h o o l i n g , the Montessori A l t e r n a t i v e Program and T r a d i t i o n a l Program i n t h e Public Schools". I h a v e r e a d t h e c o v e r i n g l e t t e r , am a w a r e o f t h e g u a r a n t e e o f c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y , what w i l l b e r e q u i r e d o f me, a n d t h e a m o u n t o f my t i m e t h i s s t u d y w i I I t a k e . I am a l s o a w a r e t h a t I aim f r e e t o w i t h d r a w a t a n y t i m e .  Name s Date; I have r e c e i v e d a copy o f t h e consent form and t h e i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h i s s t u d y (." A C o m p a r i s o n o f E d u c a t i o n a l B e l i e f s o f P a r e n t s Who H a v e C h o s e n Home S c h o o l i n g , t h e M o n t e s s o r i A l t e r n a t i v e and t h e T r a d i t i o n a l Program i n t h e P u b l i c Schools") Name: Dat e:  181  INFORMATION GROUPS  TRADITIONAL  Please  circle  Number  of children:  My 1  children 2  SCHOOLING  the appropriate  have 3  SHEET  1  RESPONDANT #s answers 2  3  4  more  than  4  attended t h e neighbourhood school f o r : 4 more t h a n 4 y e a r s  I intend to continue school i n the falI:  i n t h e r e g u l a r program yes  no  I was a w a r e o f t h e M o n t e s s o r i neighbourhood school. yes  I tried to register but was unabIe t o .  my  i n the neighbourhood  alternative  program  inthe  no  child/children  i n the Montessori  yes  program  no  I h a v e ? o r h a v e had? c h i l d r e n elementary school level. yes  i n the Montessori  program  at the  no  I h a v e 'home s c h o o l e d ' my c h i l d r e n ( i e . t a u g h t instead of s e n d i n g them t o p u b l i c o r p r i v a t e s c h o o l . ) yes no  them  a t home  I f y o u a l s o h a v e ? o r h a v e had? c h i l d r e n i n t h e M o n t e s s o r i p r o g r a m or h a v e h o m e s c h o o l e d y o u r c h i l d ? c o u l d y o u s t a t e b r i e f l y y o u r r e a s o n s (eg.other c h i l d had f r i e n d s i n t h e M o n t e s s o r i program: l i v e d i n i s o l a t e d a r e a ? no s c h o o l s n e a r b y )  I  have  been  a public  I  have  taught  school  i n the public  teacher:  schools  yes no i n the past  5 years:  yes no  1.82  INFORMATION  GROUPS  HOMESCHOOLERS  Please  circle  Number  of children:  Ages  SHEET  of  RESPONDANT #s  t h e appropriate-  1  answers  2  3  4  more t h a n  4  children:  I have been after Jan.  homeschooIing  for:  :  less  than  1 1/2 y e a r s  (started  1988) more t h a n  1 1/2. y e a r s  (started  before Jan. 1988) I  intend  I have  to continue  homeschooIing  children in public  If y e s , c o u l d student)  I have  been  I have  taught  you s t a t e  a public  school:  briefly  school  i n public  i n the f a l l :  your  teacher:  schools  yes no  yes no  reasons  (eg. high  school  yc^s no  i n t h e past  5  years:  yes no  A COMPARISON OF E D U C A T I O N A L B E L I E F S OF P A R E N T S WHO HAVE CHOSEN TO HOME S C H O O L I N G , THE MONTESSORI A L T E R N A T I V E AND THE TRADITIONAL PROGRAM IN P U B L I C SCHOOLS. 1  Dear  E n c l o s e d p l e a s e f i n d t h e c a r d s which I would l i k e you t o s o r t . Y o u may n o t i c e t h a t t h e s e a r e v i r t u a l l y i d e n t i c a l t o t h o s e you s o r t e d a few w e e k s a g o . T h i s i s because i t i s u s e f u l t o have p e o p l e do i t t w i c e . T h a t way, we c a n make s u r e t h e statements a r e c l e a r e n o u g h and a r e n o t v a g u e or a m b i g u o u s . These statements s h o u l d mean b a s i c a l l y t h e s a m e t h i n g t o d a y a s t h e y d i d two o r t h r e e w e e k s a g o a n d t h e b e s t way f o r us t o f i n d out i s t o a s k y o u t o do i t a g a i n . P l e a s e s o r t t h e m and p u t t h e m i n t h e e n v e l o p e s w h i c h y o u wiI I find herein. E a c h e n v e l o p e h a s a number f r o m i -10. A s y o u wi I I remember, e n v e l o p e 1 i s for those statements that are __________ y o u r own p h i l o s o p h y o f e d u c a t i o n and e n v e l o p e 10 i s f o r t h o s e s t a t e m e n t s most_l_i_ke_.your own p h i l o s o p h y of e d u c a t i o n . U n d e r n e a t h t h e s e n u m b e r s a r e t h e w o r d s "3 c a r d s " o r "17 cards" w h i c h d e s c r i b e s t h e number o f c a r d s y o u c a n p l a c e i n e a c h category. 1) Sort the cards 2) P l a c e them i n t h e a p p r o p r i a t e s m a l l enveI ope 3) Place a l l the sealed envelopes into enveI ope I wiI I p i c k up t h e e n v e l o p e t o m o r r o w i n Thank you a g a i n f o r your c o o p e r a t i o n .  envelope the  the  S i n c e r e Iy,  Heather  Wingert.  large  agreed  and  seal  brown  fashion.  each  187 A P P E N D I X IV INSTRUMENTS INTERVIEW  The f o l l o w i n g a r e t h e q u e s t i o n s I w o u l d h a v e been a s k i n g y o u i n a face-to-face interview. I f you c o u l d w r i t e your answers t o t h e s e q u e s t i o n s a n d r e t u r n t h e m t o me* I w i I I b e a b l e t o ' f o l l o w - u p ' b y phone any answers which I would l i k e t o pursue. Please use e x t r a paper i f n e c e s s a r y . A s y o u know. I am i n t e r e s t e d i n why p e o p l e c h o o s e , o r choose, a l t e r n a t e forms o f e d u c a t i o n . First, I would y o u a b o u t y o u r s e l f a n d y o u r own e d u c a t i o n . HS #1 Ages  19-25  26-30  1. W h e r e ( i n what y o u r e d uc a t i o n ?  country  31-35  35-40  or p r o v i n c e )  2. C o u l d y o u d e s c r i b e y o u r e d u c a t i o n s vs. urban, grades attended e t c . )  don't l i k e t o ask  41 +  d i d y o u r e c e i v e most o f  (private  vs. public,  rural  3„Did y o u e n j o y your s c h o o l i n g ? Do a n y e v e n t s o r p a r t s o f y o u r s c h o o l i n g stand out as being p a r t i c u l a r l y p l e a s a n t ? Do a n y events or p a r t s stand out as being p a r t i c u l a r l y unpleasant? (Please describe b r i e f l y )  4.Do y o u f e e l y o u r own e d u c a t i o n a l p e o p l e c l o s e t o you) a f f e c t e d your chiId? Please describe.  5. at If  experiences (or those of d e c i s i o n t o home s c h o o l your  When y o u w e r e g r o w i n g u p , d i d y o u know a n y o n e who was home? s o , how d i d t h i s a f f e c t y o u r d e c i s i o n t o h o m e s c h o o l .  Now I ' d l i k e as a parent.  to talk  about  your  adult  life  and your  taught  experiences  6. When y o u r c h i l d r e n w e r e y o u n g e r , d i d y o u c o n s u l t b o o k s o n c h i l d - r e a r i n g - such a s Dr. Spock, B u r t o n White, James Dobson, books on d i s c i p l i n e o r c o m m u n i c a t i n g ( s u c h a s P.E.T. o r S . T . E . P . ) , b o o k s on c r a f t s and t h i n g s t o do w i t h c h i l d r e n (such  188 a s T h e M o t h e r ' s Almanac.) o r b o o k s o n c h i l d d e v e l o p m e n t ( s u c h a s the s e r i e s Y o u r Two Y e a r O l d , Y o u r T h r e e Y e a r O l d e t c . ) ? If s o , c o u l d y o u g i v e me a n e x a m p l e o f t h e typ.es o f b o o k s y o u r e a d a n d ( i f y o u r e m e m b e r ) w h i c h b o o k s o r a u t h o r s made t h e m o s t i m p r e s s i o n on y o u . 7. D i d y o u r e a d much a b o u t e d u c a t i o n o r e d u c a t i o n a l ideas before you began t o home-school? ( f o r e x a m p l e , J o h n H o l t , Raymond Moore, M a r i a M o n t e s s o r i o r b o o k s a b o u t h e r , e t c . ) I f s o , w h i c h o n e s made t h e g r e a t e s t i m p r e s s i o n o n y o u . 8. I s t h e r e a n y t h i n g about your c h i l d which prompted you t o hornesc h o o I ? ( f o r example, u n u s u a l l y b r i g h t , v e r y shy, l e a r n i n g d i s a b l e d e t c . )  9. Was t h e r e a n y t h i n g a b o u t t h e l o c a l t h a t prompted you t o homeschool.?  school  or school  system  10. C o u l d y o u d e s c r i b e t h e e v e n t s l e a d i n g up t o y o u r d e c i s i o n t o homeschool? Was i t a d e c i s i o n w h i c h ' e v o l v e d ' ? Was i t i n reaction to a particular event? Were y o u p a r t i c u l a r l y influenced by t h e s u e e s s e s o f o t h e r h o m e s c h o o l e r s , by b o o k s e t c . Now I w o u l d homeschooIer. 11.  What What  like  t o ask you about  your  do you t h i n k a r e t h e g r e a t e s t are the biggest headaches?  experiences  benifit  as a  of homeschooling?  12. Do y o u f e e l t h a t h o m e s c h o o I i n g i s a p r a c t i c e t h a t most parents could undertake? What q u a l i t i e s d o y o u n e e d t o b e a homeschooling parent? 13. Do y o u f e e l t h a t h o m e s c h o o I i n g i s a p r a c t i c e ' t h a t w o u l d b e benificial t o most c h i l d r e n . What q u a l i t i e s d o e s a c h i l d n e e d t o s u i t him t o homeschooling?• 14. Do y o u f e e l t h a t t h e r e i s a r i s k t h a t h o m e s c h o o l i n g may b e f o r b i d d e n o r t h a t t h e r i g h t t o h o m e s c h o o l may b e l i m i t e d b y t h i s or f u t u r e government authorities? 15. How h a p p y a r e y o u w i t h your c h i I d r e n . E x t r e m e l y happy Somewhat h a p p y S l i g h t l y happy 16. Why children  homeschooIing  a s a way  of  educating  E x t r e m e l y unhappy Somewhat unhappy Slightly unhappy  do y o u t h i n k o t h e r p a r e n t s would p r e f e r t o s e n d t h e i r t o t h e r e g u l a r ( t r a d i t i o n a l program) or t o a Montessori  189 p r o g r a m i n t h e p u b l i c schools'? (eg. work o u t s i d e understand b e n e f i t s , lack confidence i n teaching a r e n ' t i n t e r e s t e d enough i n t h e i r c h i l d r e n ) 17. Do y o u p l a n t o f u t u r e ? Under what  send your c h i l d r e n t o c i rcumstances.  public  home, d o n ' t abilities,  school  in  the  18. Comparing Montessori and t h e r e g u l a r p r o g r a m t o h o m e s c h o o I i n g , i f h o m e s c h o o I i n g i s a 10, how would you rate Montessori o r t h e r e g u l a r p r o g r a m on a s c a l e o f 1 t o 10.  19. T h e g o v e r n m e n t i s i n t r o d u c i n g a new primary program f e a t u r i n g , f o r e x a m p l e u n g r a d e d p r i m a r y c l a s s e s and other innovations. Do y o u t h i n k t h a t t h e s e c h a n g e s w o u l d make p u b l i c s c h o o I mor e a t t r a c t i v e t o s o m e h o m e s e h o o I e r s ?  20. Attached i s a c o p y o f F a c t o r 1's 'ideal sort'. This ranking o f s t a t e m e n t s was c r e a t e d b y m a t h e m a t i c a l l y g i v i n g each person i n t h a t f a c t o r a 'weight' i n d i c a t i n g t h e i r 'importance-' and r e p r e s e n t a t i v e n e s s for that group. R e p r e s e n t a t i v e p e o p l e might c o u n t a s two p e o p l e - , v e r y u n r e p r e s e n t a t i v e p e o p l e m i g h t c o u n t as ha I f a p e r s o n . P l e a s e l o o k o v e r t h a t l i s t o f i t e m s a n d make a n y comments r e g a r d i n g how a c c u r a t e l y you feel t h a t r e p r e s e n t s your v i e w s . K e e p t h e l i s t a s I may h a v e s p e c i f i c q u e s t i o n s when I p h o n e y o u . A f t e r t a l k i n g t o y o u on t h e p h o n e , y o u r r o l e a s a s u b j e c t w i l l be complete. I wiI I b e s e n d i n g a I I s u b j e c t s a s u m m a r y o f t h e results. So f a r , i t l o o k s a s i f t h e y wiI I b e q u i t e i n t e r e s t i n g . Thank you.  130 INTERVIEW  The f o l l o w i n g a r e t h e q u e s t i o n s I would have been a s k i n g y o u i n a face-to-face interview. I f you c o u l d w r i t e your answers t o t h e s e q u e s t i o n s a n d r e t u r n t h e m t o me, I w i l l b e a b l e t o ' f o l l o w - u p ' b y phone any answers which I would l i k e t o p u r s u e . Please use extra paper i f n e c e s s a r y . A s y o u k n o w » I am i n t e r e s t e d i n why p e o p l e c h o o s e ? o r choose? a l t e r n a t e forms o f e d u c a t i o n . First? I would y o u a b o u t y o u r s e l f a n d y o u r own e d u c a t i o n . T r a d i t i o n a l #i Ages 13-25  1. W h e r e ( i n what your education?  2G-30  country  31-35  35-40  or province)  2.Could you d e s c r i b e your e d u c a t i o n : v s . urban? g r a d e s a t t e n d e d e t c . )  don't l i k e t o ask  41+  d i d y o u r e c e i v e most o f  (private  vs. public?  rural  3.Did you e n j o y your s c h o o l i n g ? Do a n y e v e n t s o r p a r t s o f y o u r schooling stand out as being p a r t i c u l a r l y pleasant? Do a n y events or p a r t s stand out as being p a r t i c u l a r l y unpleasant? (Please describe b r i e f l y )  4.Do y o u f e e l y o u r own e d u c a t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e s ( o r t h o s e o f p e o p l e c l o s e t o you) a f f e c t e d your d e c i s i o n t o choose a a r e g u l a r p u b l i c s c h o o l e d u c a t i o n f o r your c h i l d r a t h e r t h a n c h o o s e an a l t e r n a t i v e form o f e d u c a t i o n . PI e a s e d e s c r i b e .  5. When y o u w e r e g r o w i n g up? d i d y o u know a n y o n e c h i l d t o a n a l t e r n a t e s c h ooI .? I f s o ? how d i d t h i s a f f e c t y o u r d e c i s i o n ? Now I ' d l i k e as a p a r e n t .  to talk  about  your  adult  life  who s e n t  and your  their  experiences  6. When y o u r c h i l d r e n w e r e y o u n g e r ? d i d y o u c o n s u l t b o o k s o n c h i I d - r e a r i n g - s u e h a s D r . Sp oc k ? B u r t on W h i t e ? J a m e s Dob s o n ? b o o k s on d i s c i p l i n e o r c o m m u n i c a t i n g ( s u c h a s P.E.T. o r S . T . E . P . ) ? b o o k s on c r a f t s a n d t h i n g s t o do w i t h c h i l d r e n (such  191 as The M o t h e r ' s Almanac) o r books on c h i l d d e v e l o p m e n t (such a s the s e r i e s Y o u r Two Y e a r O l d , Y o u r T h r e e Y e a r O l d e t c . ) ? If s o , c o u l d y o u g i v e me a n e x a m p l e o f t h e t y f i e s o f b o o k s y o u r e a d and ( i f y o u r e m e m b e r ) w h i c h b o o k s o r a u t h o r s made t h e m o s t i m p r e s s i o n on y o u .  7. D i d y o u r e a d much a b o u t e d u c a t i o n o r e d u c a t i o n a l i d e a s b e f o r e y o u m a d e . y o u r d e c i s i o n a b o u t how t o e d u c a t e y o u r c h i l d . ( f o r e x a m p l e ? J o h n H o l t , Raymond M o o r e , M a r i a M o n t e s s o r i o r b o o k s a b o u t h e r , e t c . ) I f s o , w h i c h o n e s made t h e g r e a t e s t impression on y o u .  8. I s t h e r e a n y t h i n g about your c h i l d which prompted you t o t o f e e l t h a t t h e r e g u l a r p r o g r a m was p r e f e r a b l e t o t h e a l t e r n a t i v e programs. (for example, u n u s u a l l y b r i g h t , v e r y shy, l e a r n i n g d i s a b l e d e t c . )  9. Was t h e r e a n y t h i n g a b o u t that prompted you t o choose  t h e . I oca I school or school i t over t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s ?  10. C o u l d y o u d e s c r i b e t h e e v e n t s l e a d i n g up t o y o u r send your c h i l d t o t h e r e g u l a r program? D i d you look other programs? Now I w o u l d l i k e t o a s k y o u a b o u t Montessori parent.  your  experiences  system  decision to i n t o any  as a  11. What d o y o u t h i n k a r e t h e g r e a t e s t b e n e f i t s o f t h e r e g u l a r program? What a r e t h e b i g g e s t h e a d a c h e s o r p r o b l e m s ?  12. Do y o u t h i n k t h e r e g u l a r p r o g r a m b e n e f i t s e v e r y c h i l d ? Does t h e s c h o o l a s k a n y t h i n g o f p a r e n t s i n t h e way o f i n v o l v e m e n t i n t h e s c h o o l •-- i n t e r m s o f r e q u e s t s f o r t i m e , c o o p e r a t i o n ? Do y o u t h i n k p a r e n t s get i n v o l v e d enough? I f n o t , why n o t ?  13. Do y o u t h i n k t h e r e a r e a n y s p e c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s i c s a c h i l d needs t o b e n e f i t from t h e r e g u l a r program.? A r e t h e r e any t h i n g s t h a t m i g h t make a c h i l d u n s u i t a b l e f o r t h e p u b l i c s c h o l I p r o g r a m  14. Do y o u f e e l t h a t t h e r e i s a r i s k g o v e r n m e n t s may s e v e r e l y c u t f u n d i n g a d r a s t i c a l l y new s y s t e m .  that t h i s or future t o s c h o o l s -•- p e r h a p s  move t o  Do y o u f e e l t h a t t h e r e g u l a r p r o g r a m ' m i g h t c h a n g e d r a m a t i c a l l y o v e r t h e n e x t few y e a r s o r d o y o u t h i n k t h a t i t w i I I r e m a i n p r e t t y much a s i t i s i n t h e f o r s e e a b l e f u t u r e ( e g . u n t i l your youngest c h i l d leaves the system.) I am i n t e r e s t e d i n how i n t e n s e l y people- s u p p o r t t h e i r c h o i c e i n schooling. I f t h e s c h o o l s y s t e m were t o change dramatically» to what d e g r e e w o u l d y o u s u p p o r t c h a n g e s y o u w e r e i n f a v o u r o f o r oppose t h o s e w i t h which you d i s a g r e e d . (eg. a t t e n d meetings, r a i s e funds, s i g n p e t i t i o n s , speak w i t h your local school board, become i n v o l v e d w i t h an " a c t i o n " g r o u p or a p o l i t i c a l group.  15. How happy a r e you w i t h e d u c a t i n g your children. E x t r e m e l y happy Somewhat h a p p y S l i g h t l y happy  the  regular  program  as  a  way  of  Extremely unhappy Somewhat u n h a p p y S l i g h t l y unhappy  16 Why do y o u t h i n k o t h e r p a r e n t s w o u l d p r e f e r t o s e n d their c h i l d r e n t o t h e M o n t e s s o r i p r o g r a m i n t h e p u b l i c s c h o o l s or t o home s c h o o l t h e m ? 17. Do y o u p l a n t o s e n d y o u r or t o homeschool them i n t h e  children to the Montessori program f u t u r e ? U n d e r what circumstances.  18. C o m p a r i n g M o n t e s s o r i t o t h e r e g u l a r p r o g r a m and h o m e s c h o o I i n g , i f M o n t e s s o r i i s a 10, how w o u l d y o u r a t e H o m e s c h o o l i n g o r t h e r e g u l a r p r o g r a m on a s c a l e o f 1 t o 10. I f t h e M o n t e s s o r i p r o g r a m were not a v a i l a b l e , which o f t h o s e two o p t i o n s would you c h o o s e ? Why?  19. T h e g o v e r n m e n t i s i n t r o d u c i n g a new p r i m a r y p r o g r a m f e a t u r i n g , f o r e x a m p l e u n g r a d e d p r i m a r y c l a s s e s and other innovations. Do y o u t h i n k t h a t t h e s e c h a n g e s w o u l d make p u b l i c , s c h o o l m o r e a t t r a c t i v e t o s o m e p a r e n t s who m i g h t o t h e r w i s e c h o o s e M o n t e s s o r i or c h o o s e t o h o m e s c h o o l . Do y o u f e e l o t h e r p a r e n t s i n the r e g u l a r program w i l l l i k e i t ? How do you f e e l a b o u t i t yourself. 20. A t t a c h e d i s a c o p y o f F a c t o r 3's ' i d e a l s o r t ' . This ranking o f s t a t e m e n t s was c r e a t e d b y m a t h e m a t i c a l l y g i v i n g e a c h p e r s o n i n that f a c t o r a 'weight' i n d i c a t i n g t h e i r 'importance' and r e p r e s e n t a t i v e n e s s for that group. R e p r e s e n t a t i v e p e o p l e might c o u n t a s two p e o p l e , v e r y u n r e p r e s e n t a t i v e p e o p l e m i g h t c o u n t as half a person. P l e a s e l o o k o v e r t h a t l i s t o f i t e m s a n d make a n y c o m m e n t s r e g a r d i n g how a c c u r a t e l y you f e e l t h a t r e p r e s e n t s your views.  193 K e e p t h e l i s t a s I may h a v e s p e c i f i c q u e s t i o n s when I p h o n e y o u . A f t e r t a l k i n g t o y o u on t h e phone, y o u r r o l e a s a s u b j e c t w i l l be complete. I wiI I b e s e n d i n g a I I s u b j e c t s a summary o f t h e results. Bo f a r . i t l o o k s a s i f t h e y wiI I b e q u i t e i n t e r e s t i n g . Thank y o u  194 INTERVIEW  The f o l l o w i n g a r e t h e q u e s t i o n s I would h a v e been a s k i n g you i n a face-to-face interview. I f you c o u l d w r i t e your answers t o t h e s e q u e s t i o n s a n d r e t u r n t h e m t o me? I wiI I be a b l e t o ' f o l l o w - u p ' by phone any a n s w e r s w h i c h I would l i k e t o p u r s u e . P l e a s e * use* e x t r a paper i f n e c e s s a r y . A s y o u know? I am i n t e r e s t e d i n why p e o p l e c h o o s e , o r choose, alternate* forms of e d u c a t i o n . First? I would y o u a b o u t y o u r s e l f a n d y o u r own education. Monte*ssori Ages 19-25  don't like to  ask  #1 2&-30  1. Whe*re ( i n w h a t your educ at i on?  country  31--35  or  35-40  province!)  2.Could you d e s c r i b e your e d u c a t i o n s v s . u r b a n , grade*s a t t e n d e d etc.)  did  41 +  you  (private  r e c e i v e most  vs.  public,  of  rural  3., D i d y o u e n j o y y o u r s c h o o l i n g ? Do a n y e v e n t s o r p a r t s o f y o u r s c h o o l i n g s t a n d out as b e i n g p a r t i c u l a r l y p l e a s a n t ? Do any e v e n t s or p a r t s s t a n d out as b e i n g p a r t i c u l a r l y unpleasant? (Please describe* brie*fly)  4 „ D o y o u f e e l y o u r own educational experiences p e o p l e close* t o you) a f f e c t e d your d e c i s i o n t o M o n t e s s o r i e d u c a t i o n f o r your child. P l e a s e describe*.  (or t h o s e choose a  5. When y o u w e r e g r o w i n g u p , d i d y o u know a n y o n e c h i l d to a Montessori school.? I f s o , how d i d t h i s a f f e c t y o u r d e c i s i o n ? Now I'd l i k e as a parent.  to  talk  about  your  adult  life*  and  who  your  sent  of  their  experiences  6. When y o u r c h i l d r e n w e r e y o u n g e r , d i d y o u c o n s u l t b o o k s o n c h i l d - r e a r i n g - s u c h a s D r . S p o c k , B u r t o n White*, J a m e s Dob s o n , b o o k s on d i s c i p l i n e o r c o m m u n i c a t i n g ( s u c h a s P . E . T . o r S . T . E . P . ) , b o o k s on c r a f t s a n d t h i n g s t o d o w i t h c h i l d r e n (such a s T h e M o t h e r ' s A l m a n a c ) o r b o o k s on c h i l d d e v e l o p m e n t ( s u c h a s the s e r i e s Y o u r Two Y e a r O l d , Y o u r T h r e e Y e a r O l d e t c . ) ? If s o , c o u l d y o u g i v e me a n e x a m p l e o f the? t y p . e s o f b o o k s y o u r e a d and ( i f y o u r e m e m b e r ) w h i c h b o o k s o r a u t h o r s made t h e m o s t i mp r e s s i on o n you.  7. D i d y o u r e a d much a b o u t e d u c a t i o n o r e d u c a t i o n a l i d e a s b e f o r e y o u made y o u r d e c i s i o n a b o u t how t o e d u c a t e y o u r c h i l d . (for e x a m p l e ? J o h n H o l t ? Raymond M o o r e ? M a r i a M o n t e s s o r i o r b o o k s a b o u t h e r ? e t c . ) I f s o ? w h i c h o n e s made t h e g r e a t e s t i m p r e s s i o n on y o u .  8.. I s t h e r e a n y t h i n g about your c h i l d which prompted you t o send him/her t o M o n t e s s o r i ? ( f o r example? u n u s u a l l y b r i g h t ? v e r y shy? l e a r n i n g d i s a b l e d e t c . ) 3. Was t h e r e a n y t h i n g a b o u t that prompted you t o choose  t h e l o c a l school or school system the Montesorri alternative?  10. C o u l d y o u d e s c r i b e t h e e v e n t s l e a d i n g up t o y o u r d e c i s i o n t o send your c h i l d t o M o n t e s s o r i ? Was i t a d e c i s i o n w h i c h 'evolved'? Was i t i n r e a c t i o n t o a p a r t i c u l a r e v e n t ? Were y o u p a r t i c u l a r l y i n f l u e n c e d by t h e s u c e s s e s o f o t h e r Montessori p a r e n t s ? by b o o k s e t c . Now I w o u l d l i k e t o a s k y o u a b o u t Montessor i parent.  your  11. What d o y o u t h i n k a r e t h e g r e a t e s t program? What a r e t h e b i g g e s t h e a d a c h e s ?  experiences  as a  b e n e f i t s of the Montessori  12. Do y o u t h i n k t h e M o n t e s s o r i p r o g r a m w o u l d b e n e f i t every child? Do n e e d a n y s p e c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a s a p a r e n t t o i n v o l v e y o u r s e l f i n t h i s program? Why d o y o u t h i n k m o r e p a r e n t s don't send t h e i r c h i l d r e n t o t h e program.(eg. don't understand benefits? can't get i n e t c . ) 13. Do y o u t h i n k needs t o b e n e f i t  t h e r e a r e any s p e c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s i c s from t h e M o n t e s s o r i program.?  a  child  14. Do y o u f e e l t h a t t h e r e i s a r i s k t h a t t h e M o n t e s s o r i program i n D i s t r i c t #43 may b e p h a s e d o u t o v e r t h e n e x t few y e a r s , 15. How h a p p y a r e y o u w i t h chiIdren. Extremely happy Somewhat h a p p y S l i g h t l y happy  Montessori  a s a way  of educating  your  Extremely unhappy Somewhat u n h a p p y £5lightly u n h a p p y  16. Do y o u p l a n t o s e n d y o u r c h i l d r e n t o t h e r e g u l a r p r o g r a m o r another a l t e r n a t e non-Montessori program (eg. L a t e Immersion) i n t h e f u t u r e ? U n d e r what circumstances.  196 18. Comparing M o n t e s s o r i t o t h e r e g u l a r program and homeschooling, i f M o n t e s s o r i i s a 10, how w o u l d y o u r a t e H o m e s c h o o I i n g o r t h e r e g u l a r p r o g r a m o n a s c a l e o f 1 t o 10. I f t h e M o n t e s s o r i p r o g r a m were n o t a v a i l a b l e , w h i c h o f t h o s e two o p t i o n s would you choose? Why?  19. T h e g o v e r n m e n t i s i n t r o d u c i n g a new p r i m a r y p r o g r a m f e a t u r i n g , f o r example ungraded p r i m a r y c l a s s e s and o t h e r innovations. Do y o u t h i n k t h a t t h e s e c h a n g e s w o u l d make p u b l i c s c h o o l m o r e a t t r a c t i v e - t o some p a r e n t s who m i g h t o t h e r w i s e choose Montessor i .  20. A t t a c h e d i s a c o p y o f F a c t o r 1's ' i d e a l s o r t ' . This ranking of s t a t e m e n t s was c r e a t e d b y m a t h e m a t i c a l l y g i v i n g e a c h p e r s o n i n t h a t f a c t o r a ' w e i g h t ' i n d i c a t i n g t h e i r ' i m p o r t a n c e ' and r e p r e s e n t a t i v e n e s s f o r that group. R e p r e s e n t a t i v e p e o p l e might c o u n t a s two p e o p l e , v e r y u n r e p r e s e n t a t i v e p e o p l e might c o u n t a s ha I f a p e r s o n . P l e a s e l o o k o v e r t h a t l i s t o f i t e m s a n d make a n y c o m m e n t s r e g a r d i n g how a c c u r a t e l y y o u f e e l t h a t r e p r e s e n t s y o u r views. K e e p t h e l i s t a s I may h a v e s p e c i f i c q u e s t i o n s when I p h o n e y o u . A f t e r t a l k i n g t o y o u on t h e phone, y o u r r o l e a s a s u b j e c t w i l l be complete. I wiI I b e s e n d i n g a l I s u b j e c t s a summary o f t h e results. So f a r , i t l o o k s a s i f t h e y wiI I be q u i t e interesting. Thank y o u .  197  CHILD  PI e a s e  REARING  CONTROL  c h ec k on e: I  I have  LOCUS OF  elementary  school  am  age  a  male  children  female  (4  1/2  -  13)  yes  no  H e r e a r e 18 p a i r s o f s t a t e m e n t s a b o u t r a i s i n g a n d e d u c a t i n g chiIdren. In e a c h p a i r o f s t a t e m e n t s , p l e a s e s e l e c t which statement you a g r e e w i t h b y c i r c l i n g Ca) o r Cb) . S o m e t i m e s , i t wiI I be h a r d t o d e c i d e , h o w e v e r , c h o o s e w h i c h o f t h e two y o u f e e l i s c l o s e s t t o y o u r own op i n i o n .  1.,  a)  b)  2.  a) b)  3.  a) b)  4  a) b)  5  a) b)  When a c h i l d g e t s i n t o t r o u b l e o r it i s u s u a l l y because h i s parents time, a t t e n t i o n o r d i s c i p l i n e he No o n e know why, b u t some* k i d s g e t m a t t e r how h a r d t h e i r p a r e n t s t r y  becomes a d e l i n q u e n t , h a v e n ' t g i v e n him the needs, i n t o t r o u b l e no t o b r i n g t h e m up we I I.  C h i l d r e n seldom a p p r e c i a t e the s a c r i f i c e s t h e i r parents h a v e made f o r t h e m , I f y o u r a i s e y o u r c h i l d r e n wel I , t h e y w i I I a p p r e c i a t e i t when they are older. T o g e t t o p g r a d e s i n h i g h s c h o o l , a c h i l d must a lot of natural intelligence, S u c c e s s i n h i g h s c h o o l d e p e n d s m o s t l y on t h e w i l l i n g n e s s t o work h a r d a n d make s a c r i f i c e ' s .  have  B e c a u s e o f T.V., v i d e o games and o t h e r 'instant a m u s e m e n t s ' , c h i l d r e n no I o n g e r want t o l e a r n t o r e a d , I f c h i l d r e n a r e t a u g h t t o r e a d welI and i n t r o d u c e d t o intere*sting b o o k s , the*y w i l l n a t u r a l l y pre*fe*r t h e m t o p a s s i v e a c t i v i t i e s like* TV a n d v i d e o g a m e s . The* diff You alI  w o r l d h a s become s o c o m p l e x t h e s e d a y s t h a t i s i s i c u l t to know how t o r a i s e ? a c h i l d , d o n ' t n e e d e x p e r t s t o know how t o r a i s e * a c h i l d •y o u n e e d i s common s e n s e .  198  6  a)  b)  7  a)  b)  8  a') b)  If a c h i l d i s h a v i n g t r o u b l e i n s c h o o l - t h e p a r e n t s c a n u s u a l l y f i n d a way t o w o r k w i t h t h e t e a c h e r s t o h e l p their chiId. If a c h i l d i s having t r o u b l e i n s c h o o l , t h e r e i s l i t t l e a parent c a n do. s i n c e i t i s r e a l l y up t o t h e t e a c h e r and t h e s c h o o l s y s t e m t o h e l p t h e c h i l d . If a c h i l d h a s d i f f i c u l t i e s , u s u a l l y a t e a c h e r , a c h i l d p s y c h o l o g i s t o r a c o u n s e l l o r show t h e p a r e n t b e t t e r ways t o h e Ip t h e c h i I d . P a r e n t s a r e g e n e r a l l y i n t h e b e s t p o s i t i o n t o know w h a t t h e i r c h i l d n e e d s , e v e n i f i t means g o i n g a g a i n s t t h e a d v i c e o f te£*c:hers, a n d o t h e r e x p e r t s .  O v e r a l l , a c h i l d ' s p a r e n t s a r e t h e most important i n f l u e n c e s i n h i s or her l i f e . It i s v e r y h a r d f o r p a r e n t s t o c o m p e t e a g a i n s t t h e i n f l u e n c e o f t h e c h i l d ' s f r i e n d s and peer p r e s s u r e .  9  a) P a r e n t s a r e g e n e r a l l y t o o p e r s o n a l l y i n v o l v e d w i t h t h e i r c h i l d t o make s e e h i m a s h e r e a l l y i s . b) P a r e n t s g e n e r a l l y know t h e i r c h i l d b e s t a n d a r e t h e b e s t p e o p l e t o make d e c i s i o n s a b o u t t h e i r child.  10  a ) P a r e n t s who h a v e f i r m v a l u e s a n d h i g h s t a n d a r d s c a n almost always convince t h e i r c h i l d r e n t o r e s i s t o u t s i d e in fIuences. b) I t i s a l m o s t i m p o s s i b l e f o r p a r e n t s t o c o m p e t e w i t h t h e e f f e c t o f r o c k m u s i c , T.V. a n d t o d a y ' s s o c i e t y o n t h e i r chiIdren.  11  a) T e a c h i n g i s a p r o f e s s i o n f o r which one needs s p e c i a l i z e d t r a i n i n g , e s p e c i a l l y i n t o d a y s i n c r e a s i n g l y complex soci ety. b) T h e i m p o r t a n t t h i n g s t h a t h a v e t o b e l e a r n e d b y a c h i l d can be t a u g h t by any e d u c a t e d adult.  12 a ) I f a c h i l d i s h a v i n g a p r o b l e m a t s c h o o l , s o m e t i m e s t h e best course o f a c t i o n i s t o change t e a c h e r s or s c h o o l s or e d u c a t i o n a l systems and f i n d i n g one t h a t can h e l p t h e child. b) T h e r e i s n o t much p o i n t i s c h a n g i n g t e a c h e r s , s c h o o l s , o r e d u c a t i o n a l s y s t e m s . B a s i c a l l y , t h e y a r e a l I t h e same a n d t h e c h i l d w i l l h a v e t h e same p r o b l e m r e g a r d l e s s o f where he i s . 13  a ) C h i l d r e n a r e b o r n w i t h t h e i r own t e m p e r a m e n t s s h y , a g g r e s s i v e , l a z y - a n d t h e r e i s n o t much do t o c h a n g e them.  - bright, parents can  i 99 b)  14  a) b)  15  a) b)  16  a)  b)  17  a)  much t h e r e s u l t  o f how  " G i f t e d " c h i l d r e n a r e c h i l d r e n who w e r e b o r n with unusuaI i nteI IectuaI a b i I i t i e s . " G i f t e d " c h i l d r e n are* o r d i n a r y c h i l d r e n who w e r e f o r t u n a t e e n o u g h t o h a v e p a r e n t s who h a v e e x p o s e d to a lot of educational experiences.  them  The o p p o r t u n i t y t o go t o a good p r i v a t e or p u b l i c s c h o o l i s t h e best guarentee o f academic success, T h e g o o d home e n v i r o n m e n t p r o v i d e s t h e b e s t g u a r e n t e e o f academic success. Whether a c h i l d i s ' g i f t e d ' , a v e r a g e , learning disabled or a t t h e bottom o f t h e c l a s s i s m a i n l y a matter o f luck and what a b i l i t i e s a c h i l d i s b o r n with, M o s t o f t h e d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n c h i l d r e n who a r e ' g i f t e d ' , average, l e a r n i n g d i s a b l e d or a t t h e bottom o f the c l a s s i s a r e s u l t o f t h e c h i l d h a v i n g a g o o d home environment and h a v i n g been taught t h e v i r t u e s o f hard work a n d a g o o d a t t i t u d e t o w a r d s l e a r n i n g . C h i l d r e n who a r e d i a g n o s e d as having learning d i s a b i l i t i e s c a n be h e l p e d b y h a v i n g t h e i r p a r e n t s work w i t h t h e m a t home, h e l p i n g t h e m t o u n d e r s t a n d their s c h o o I wor k b e t t e r . C h i l d r e n who a r e d i a g n o s e d as having learning d i s a b i l i t i e s n e e d t o b e h e l p e d b y t e a c h e r s who a r e f a m i l i a r with s p e c i a l i s e d t e a c h i n g techniques which a r e n o t f a m i l i a r t o most p a r e n t s o r e v e n t o a l l teachers.  b)  18  C h i l d r e n temperaments a r e p r e t t y t h e i r p a r e n t s have r a i s e d them.  a)  b)  When i t c o m e s t o d e c i d i n g what c o u r s e s a c h i l d should t a k e o r whether he s h o u l d p a r t i c i p a t e i n academic o r v o c a t i o n a l c l a s s e s (assuming t h e c h i l d h a s no p r e f e r e n c e ) , t h e p a r e n t s w i s h e s s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d , but the t e a c h e r s , and t h e school c o n s e i l o r a r e i n t h e b e s t p o s i t i o n t o make t h e f i n a l d e c i s i o n , When i t c o m e s t o d e c i d i n g what c o u r s e s a c h i l d should t a k e o r whether he s h o u l d p a r t i c i p a t e i n academic o r v o c a t i o n a l c l a s s e s (assuming t h e c h i l d h a s no p r e f e r e n c e ) , t h e o p i n i o n o f t h e t e a c h e r s and t h e school counsel l o r s h o u l d be r e s p e c t e d but i n t h e end, t h et h e p a r e n t s a r e i n t h e b e s t p o s i t i o n t o make t h e f i n a l decision.  CHILD REARING  L O C U S OF  CONTROL  H e r e a r e 12 p a i r s o f s t a t e m e n t s a b o u t r a i s i n g a n d e d u c a t i n g c h i I dr€*n. In e a c h p a i r o f s t a t e m e n t s , please s e l e c t which statement you a g r e e w i t h by c i r c l i n g (.&') o r C b ) . S o m e t i m e s , i t wi I I b e h a r d t d e c i d e , however, c h o o s e w h i c h o f t h e two you f e e l i s c l o s e s t t o y o u r own op i n i o n .  1.  a)  b)  a) b)  a) b)  4  a)  b)  When a c h i l d g e t s i n t o t r o u b l e o r b e c o m e s a d e l i n q u e n t , i t i s u s u a l l y because h i s p a r e n t s haven't g i v e n him the t i me, a t t e n t i on o r d i s c i p I i n e h e n e e d s . No o n e know why, b u t some k i d s g e t i n t o t r o u b l e n o m a t t e r how h a r d t h e i r p a r e n t s t r y t o b r i n g t h e m up w e l I .  To g e t t o p g r a d e s i n h i g h s c h o o l , a c h i l d m u s t a lot of natural intelligence. S u c c e s s i n h i g h s c h o o l d e p e n d s m o s t l y on t h e w i l l i n g n e s s t o w o r k h a r d a n d make s a c r i f i c e s .  The di f You all  have  w o r l d has become s o c o m p l e x t h e s e d a y s t h a t i s i s f i c u I t t o k n ow h ow t o r a i s e a c h i I d. d o n ' t n e e d e x p e r t s t o know how to raise a child y o u n e e d i s common s e n s e .  I f a c h i l d has d i f f i c u l t i e s , u s u a l l y a t e a c h e r , a c h i l d p s y c h o l o g i s t or a c o u n s e l l o r show t h e p a r e n t b e t t e r ways t o he Ip the c h i l d , P a r e n t s a r e g e n e r a l l y i n t h e b e s t p o s i t i o n t o know what t h e i r c h i l d n e e d s , e v e n i f i t m e a n s g o i n g a g a i n s t the* a d v i c e o f t e a c h e r s , and o t h e r e x p e r t s .  5  a)Parents are g e n e r a l l y too p e r s o n a l l y involved with their c h i l d t o make s e e h i m a s h e r e a l l y i s . b ) P a r e n t s g e n e r a l l y know t h e i r c h i l d b e s t a n d a r e t h e b e s t p e o p l e t o make d e c i s i o n s a b o u t t h e i r child.  6  a ) P a r e n t s who h a v e f i r m v a l u e s a n d h i g h s t a n d a r d s c a n a l m o s t ^Always c o n v i n c e t h e i r c h i l d r e n t o r e s i s t o u t s i d e infIuences. b ) I t i s almost i m p o s s i b l e for p a r e n t s t o compete with the e f f e c t o f r o c k m u s i c , T.V. a n d t o d a y ' s s o c i e t y on t h e i r chiIdren.  201  7  a ) T e a c h i n g i s a p r o f e s s i o n f o r which one needs s p e c i a l i z e d t r a i n i n g ? e s p e c i a l l y i n t o d a y s i n c r e a s i n g l y complex society. b)The important t h i n g s t h a t have t o be l e a r n e d by a c h i l d c a n be* t a u g h t b y a n y e d u c a t e d adult. 8 a ) C h i l d r e n are* b o r n w i t h t h e i r own t e m p e r a m e n t s --• b r i g h t ? shy? a g g r e s s i v e ? l a z y - a n d t h e r e i s n o t much p a r e n t s c a n do t o c h a n g e them, b ) C h i l d r e n t e m p e r a m e n t s a r e p r e t t y much t h e r e s u l t o f how the*ir p a r e n t s h a v e r a i s e d them.  9  a ) T h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o go t o a good p r i v a t e or p u b l i c s c h o o l i s t h e best guarentee o f academic success. b ) T h e g o o d home e n v i r o n m e n t p r o v i d e s t h e b e s t g u a r e n t e e o f academic s u c c e s s .  10  a)Whether a c h i l d i s ' g i f t e d ' ? average? l e a r n i n g d i s a b l e d o r a t the* b o t t o m o f the* c l a s s i s m a i n l y a m a t t e r o f l u c k o r what a b i l i t i e s a c h i l d i s b o r n with, b) M o s t o f t h e d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n c h i l d r e n who a r e ' g i f t e d ' ? average? l e a r n i n g d i s a b l e d or at t h e bottom of t h e c l a s s i s a r e s u l t o f the* c h i l d h a v i n g a g o o d home environment and h a v i n g been taught t h e v i r t u e s o f hard work a n d a g o o d a t t i t u d e t o w a r d s l e a r n i n g .  11  a ) C h i l d r e n who a r e d i a g n o s e d a s h a v i n g learning disabilities c a n be h e l p e d b y h a v i n g the*ir p a r e n t s work w i t h them a t home? h e l p i n g t h e m t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e i r s c h o o l work b e t t e r , b ) C h i l d r e n who are* d i a g n o s e d as having learning d i s a b i l i t i e s n e e d t o b e h e l p e d b y t e a c h e r s who a r e familiar with s p e c i a l i z e d teaching techniques w h i c h a r e n o t f a m i l i a r t o most p a r e n t s o r e v e n t o a l l teachers.  12  a ) When i t c o m e s t o d e c i d i n g w h a t c o u r s e s a c h i l d should t a k e o r whether he s h o u l d p a r t i c i p a t e i n academic o r v o c a t i o n a l c l a s s e s (assuming t h e c h i l d h a s no p r e f e r e n c e ) ? the* p a r e n t s w i s h e s s h o u l d b e c o n s i d e r e d ? b u t the t e a c h e r s ? and t h e school c o n s e i l o r a r e i n t h e b e s t p o s i t i o n t o make t h e f i n a l d e c i s i o n . b> When i t c o m e s t o d e c i d i n g what c o u r s e s a c h i l d should t a k e o r w h e t h e r he* s h o u l d p a r t i c i p a t e * i n a c a d e m i c o r vocational classes (assuming t h e c h i l d h a s no p r e f e r e n c e ) , the* o p i n i o n o f t h e t e a c h e r s a n d the* s c h o o l c o u n s e l l o r s h o u l d b e r e s p e c t e d b u t i n t h e end? the p a r e n t s are* i n t h e be*st p o s i t i o n t o make the* f i n a l dec i s i o n .  THE  ROTTER  INTERNAL-EXTERNAL  CONTROL  SCALE  In e a c h p a i r o f s t a t e m e n t s , s e l e c t t h e s t a t e m e n t y o u m o s t a g r e e w i t h b y c i r c l i n g e i t h e r <!a) o r ( b ) . S o m e t i m e s ? i t w i l l be h a r d t o d e c i d e ? however? c h o o s e w h i c h o f t h e two i s c l o s e s t t o y o u r own o p i n i o n . P l e a s e do n o t o m i t any. 1.  a)  C h i l d r e n get i n t o t r o u b l e because t h e i r t o o much b) The t r o u b l e w i t h most c h i l d r e n n o w a d a y s p a r e n t s a r e t o o e a s y on t h e m .  parents  punish  i s that  their  them  2.  Many o f t h e u n h a p p y t h i n g s i n p e o p l e ' s l i v e s a r e p a r t l y due t o bad Iuck. h ) P e o p l e ' s m i s f o r t u n e s r e s u l t f r o m t h e m i s t a k e s t h e y make.  3.  a)  4.  a)  One o f t h e m a j o r r e a s o n s why we h a v e w a r s i s b e c a u s e don't t a k e enough i n t e r e s t i n p o l i t i c s . b) T h e r e w i I I a l w a y s b e w a r s ? n o m a t t e r how h a r d p e o p l e p r e v e n t them. a)  In t h e l o n g r u n p e o p l e get t h e worId. b> U n f o r t u n a t e l y ? a n i n d i v i d u a l ' s u n r e c o g n i z e d n o m a t t e r how h a r d h e  respect  they  worth o f t e n tries.  deserve  people try  in  to  this  passes  5.  a) b)  The i d e a t h a t t e a c h e r s a r e u n f a i r t o s t u d e n t s i s n o n s e n s e , Most s t u d e n t s d o n ' t r e a l i z e t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h t h e i r g r a d e s a r e i n f l u e n c e d by a c c i d e n t a l happenings.  6.  a) b)  W i t h o u t t h e r i g h t b r e a k s ? one c a n n o t be an e f f e c t i v e l e a d e r C a p a b l e p e o p l e who f a i r t o become l e a d e r s h a v e not t a k e n advantage of t h e i r opportunities.  7.  a) b)  No m a t t e r how h a r d y o u t r y s o m e p e o p l e j u s t d o n ' t l i k e y o u P e o p l e who c a n ' t g e t o t h e r s t o l i k e t h e m d o n ' t understand how t o g e t a l o n g w i t h o t h e r s .  S.  a)  H e r e d i t y p l a y s t h e major r o l e i n d e t e r m i n i n g one's personality. I t i s o n e ' s e x p e r i e n c e s i n l i f e w h i c h d e t e r m i n e what are I ike.  b)  9.  a) b)  10  a) b)  they  I h a v e o f t e n f o u n d t h a t what i s g o i n g t o h a p p e n w i I I happen. T r u s t i n g t o f a t e h a s n e v e r t u r n e d o u t a s we I I f o r me as making a d e c i s i o n t o t a k e a d e f i n i t e c o u r s e o f a c t i o n . In t h e c a s e o f t h e welI p r e p a r e d s t u d e n t t h e r e i s r a r e l y i f e v e r s u c h a t h i n g a s an u n f a i r test Many t i m e s exam q u e s t i o n s t e n d t o b e s o u n r e l a t e d t o c o u r s e work t h a t s t u d y i n g i s r e a l l y u s e l e s s .  11  a ) B e c o m i n g a s u c c e s s i s a m a t t e r o f h a r d work, l u c k h a s l i t t l e or n o t h i n g t o do w i t h i t . b) G e t t i n g a g o o d j o b d e p e n d s m a i n l y on b e i n g i n t h e r i g h t p I a c e a t t h e r i g h t t i m e.  12  a) The a v e r a g e c i t i z e n c a n have an i n f l u e n c e i n government dec i s i ons. b) T h i s w o r l d i s r u n b y t h e f e w p e o p l e i n p o w e r , a n d t h e r e i not much t h e l i t t l e g u y c a n d o a b o u t i t .  13  a ) When I make p l a n s . I am a l m o s t c e r t a i n I c a n make t h e m wor k. b) I t i s n o t a l w a y s w i s e t o p l a c e t o o f a r a h e a d b e c a u s e many t h i n g s t u r n o u t t o be a m a t t e r o f good o r bad f o r t u n e anyway.  14  a) T h e r e b".> T h e r e  1'5 a ) b)  16  a r e c e r t a i n p e o p l e who a r e j u s t i s some g o o d i n e v e r y b o d y .  no  good.  I n my c a s e g e t t i n g w h a t I want h a s l i t t l e o r n o t h i n g t o d w i t h Iuc k. Many t i m e s we m i g h t j u s t a s we I I d e c i d e w h a t t o d o b y fIipping a coin.  a ) Who g e t s t o b e t h e b o s s o f t e n d e p e n d s o n who enough t o be i n t h e r i g h t p l a c e f i r s t . b> G e t t i n g p e o p l e t o d o t h e r i g h t t h i n g d e p e n d s l u c k h a s l i t t l e t o do w i t h i t .  was  lucky  upon  ability  17  a ) A s f a r a s w o r l d a f f a i r s a r e c o n c e r n e d , most o f u s a r e t h e v i c t i m s o f f o r c e s we c a n n e i t h e r u n d e r s t a n d n o r c o n t r o l , b) B y t a k i n g a n a c t i v e p a r t i n p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l affairs the people can control world events.  IB  a) Most p e o p l e d o n ' t r e a l i z e t h e e x t e n d t o w h i c h are c o n t r o l l e d by a c c i d e n t a l happenings, b) T h e r e r e a l l y i s n o s u c h t h i n g a s " l u c k " .  19  a ) One s h o u l d a l w a y s be- wi I l i n g t o a d m i t mistakes, b ) I t i s u s u a l l y b e s t t o c o v e r up o n e ' s m i s t a k e s .  20  a) b)  21  I t i s h a r d t o know w h e t h e r o r n o t a p e r s o n you. How many f r i e n d s y o u h a v e d e p e n d s u p o n how you a r e.  their  real l y nice  a  lives  likes person  a ) I n t h e l o n g r u n t h e b a d t h i n g s t h a t h a p p e n t o u s aire b a l a n c e d b y t h e g o o d on e s . b) M o s t m i s f o r t u n e s a r e t h e r e s u l t o f l a c k o f a b i l i t y , i g n o r a n c e or l a z i n e s s , or a I I t h r e e .  a) b)  a) b)  a) b>  a) b'.)  W i t h e n o u g h e f f o r t we c a n w i p e o u t p o l i t i c a l corruption. It; i s d i f f i c u l t f o r p e o p l e t o h a v e much c o n t r o l o v e r t h e t h i n g s p o l i t i c i a n s do i n o f f i c e . Sometimes I can't u n d e r s t a n d grades they give. There i s a d i r e c t connection the grades I g e t . A good l e a d e r e x p e c t s p e o p l e t h e y s h o u I d d o. A good l e a d e r makes i t c l e a r are.  how  teachers arrive  between  how  t o decide  hard  I  at the study  t o themselves  t o everybody  what  Many t i m e s I f e e l I have l i t t l e i n f l u e n c e over t h a t h a p p e n t o me. I t i s i m p o s s i b l e f o r me t o b e l i e v e t h a t c h a n c e p l a y s a n i m p o r t a n t r o l e i n my life.  their  and  what jobs  the things or  luck  a) b)  P e o p l e a r e l o n e l y b e c a u s e t h e y d o n ' t t r y t o be f r i e n d l y . T h e r e ' s n o t much u s e i n t r y i n g t o o h a r d t o p l e a s e p e o p l e , i f they l i k e you, they l i k e you.  a) b)  T h e r e i s t o o much e m p h a s i s o n a t h l e t i c s i n h i g h s c h o o l . Team s p o r t s a r e a n e x c e l l e n t way t o b u i l d c h a r a c t e r .  a) b)  What h a p p e n s t o me i s my own d o i n g . Sometimes I feel t h a t I don't have enough d i r e c t i o n my l i f e i s t a k i n g .  a)  Most o f t h e t h e way t h e y b) I n t h e l o n g g o v e r n m e n t on  control  over  t i m e I c a n ' t u n d e r s t a n d why p o l i t i c i a n s do. r u n , t h e p e o p l e a r e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r bad a n a t i o n a l a s welI a s on a l o c a l level.  the  behave  LEVENSON'S  DIRECTIONS I, P AND C S C A L E S  Attached i s a s e r i e s of a t t i t u d e statements. Each r e p r e s e n t s a commonly h e l d o p i n i o n . T h e r e a r e no r i g h t or wrong a n s w e r s . You w i l l p r o b a b l y a g r e e w i t h some i t e m s a n d d i s a g r e e w i t h o t h e r s . We are i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e e x t e n t t o which you a g r e e or d i s a g r e e w i t h s u e h mat t e r s . Read e a c h s t a t e m e n t c a r e f u l l y . Then i n d i c a t e t h e e x t e n t t o which y o u a g r e e o r d i s a g r e e b y c i r c l i n g t h e number f o l l o w i n g e a c h statement. The numbers and t e h i r m e a n i n g s a r e i n d i c a t e d below. If If If  you you you  agree agree agree  strongly: somewhat: slightly:  circle circle circle  If If If  you you you  disagree s l i g h t l y : d i s a g r e e somewhat: disagree strongly:  -1-3 +2 +1  c ir c I e circle circle  -1 -2 ~3  F i r s t impressions are usually best. Read each s t a t e m e n t , i f you a g r e e or d i s a g r e e and t h e s t r e n g t h o f your o p i n i o n t h e n c i r c l e t h e a p p r o p r i a t e number. G I V E YOUR O P I N I O N ON STATEMENT. I f you f i n d t h a t t h e numbers t o be used t o not adequately reflect y o u r own o p i n n i o n , u s e t h e o n e t h a t i s t o t h e way y o u f e e l . Thank you.  decide and EVERY closest  206 W h e t h e r o r n o t I g e t what want d e p e n d s m o s t I y o n my  I  St/D  ability.  S/D  D  A  S/A  St/A*  -3  -2  -1  ' +1  +2  +3  c o n t r o l l e d by a c c i d e n t a l happenings. I feel l i k e what h a p p e n s i n my l i f e i s m o s t l y d e t e r m i n e d by powerful people.  ~3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  Whether or n o t I g e t i n t o a car a c c i d e n t d e p e n d s m o s t l y on how g o o d a d r i v e r I am.  -3  -2  -1  +i  +2  +3  When I make p l a n s , I am a l m o s t c e r t a i n t o make t h e m w o r k .  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  -3  -2  -1  +i  +2  +3  -3  -2  -1  -3  -2  --1  +1  +2  +3  -3  --2  -1  +1  +2  +3  -3  -2  ~ - l +1  -3  -2  --1  - i - l +2  ~3 —3  --'2 -'2  -1 - i  +1 +1  To  a great  extent,  my  life i s  O f t e n t h e r e i s no c h a n c e o f p r o t e c t i n g my p e r s o n a l i n t e r e s t s f r o m b a d Iuc k happenings When I g e t what usually because  I want i t ' s I'm l u c k y .  A l t h o u g h I have good a b i l i t y , I wiI I n o t be g i v e n l e a d e r s h i p r e s p o n s i b I i t y without appealing t o those i n p o s i t i cms o f p o w e r How many f r i e n d s I h a v e d e p e n d s o n how n i c e a p e r s o n  I  +1  +2  +3  ani I  have  going My  found  that  t o happen  life  wi I I h a p p e n  i s chiefly  by p o w e r f u l Whether  what i s +2.  +3  controlled  others.  or not I get i n t o  +3  a  car accident i s mostly a P ot p el re o l ifk e I umcyks e l f h a v e v e r y me at l i t t l e chance of p r o t e c t i n g o u r p e r s o n a l i n t e r e s t s when they c o n f l i c t with those of strong pressure groups.  +2 +2  +3 +3  207 It's n o t a l w a y s w i s e f o r me t o p l a n t o o f a r ahead because many t h i n g s t u r n o u t t o b e a matter o f good o r bad f o r t u n e .  St/D  S/D  D  A  S/A  St/A*  -3  -2  -I  +1  +2  +3  -3  -2  -1  +i  +2  +3  -3  —2  -1  +1  +2  +3  -3  -™2  -1  +i  +2  +3  I c a n p r e t t y much d e t e r m i n e w h a t w i I I h a p p e n i n my life.  -~3  —2  -1  +1  +2  +3  I am u s u a l l y a b l e t o p r o t e c t my p e r s o n a I i n t e r e s t s .  --3  ~2  -1  +1  +2  +3  W h e t h e r o r n o t I cjet i n t o a car a c c i d e n t d e p e n d s m o s t l y on the other d r i v e r .  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  When I g e t w h a t usual l y because for i t .  -3  -2  -1  +1.  +2  +3  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  +2  +3  G e t t i n g what I want r e q u i r e s p l e a s i n g those p e o p l e above me. Whether o f n o t I g e t t o be a l e a d e r d e p e n d s on w h e t h e r I'm l u c k y enough t o be a t t h e right place at the right time. If i m p o r t a n t p e o p l e were t o d e c i d e t h e y d i d n ' t l i k e me? I p r o b a b l y wouldn't make many fr i ends.  I want? i t ' s I worked hard  In o r d e r t o h a v e my p l a n s work? I make s u r e t h e y f i t i n w i t h t h e d e s i r e s o f p e o p l e who h a v e p o w e r o v e r me. My l i f e i s d e t e r m i n e d own a c t i o n s .  b y my  --3  -2  -1  +i  It's c h i e f l y a matter whether or n o t I have many f r i e n d s .  of fate few o r  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  $St/D s t r o n g I y d i sagree S/D D i s a g r e e somewhat D D i s a g r e e s I :i. g h t I y A Agree s i i g h t I y S/A A g r e e somewhat St/A Agree s t r o n g l y  +3  208  S T A T E M E N T S FOR  QSORT  I. T h e b e s t way f o r c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i s f r o m an a d u l t leader w i t h a g r o u p o f c h i l d r e n t h e same a g e . CM) 2,. T h e b e s t way for c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i s from o t h e r c h i l d r e n . CD 3. T h e b e s t way for c h i l d r e n to learn i s i n a to one-to-on s i t u a t i o n from a p a r e n t or s i m i l a r a d u l t t u t o r . CO 4. Children l e a r n b e s t i n an a t m o s p h e r e o f f r i e n d l y i n d i v i d u a l o r g r oup compet i t i on. CO 5. Children l e a r n b e s t i n an a t m o s p h e r e o f c o o p e r a t i o n w h e r e c omp e t i t i on i s a v o i d e d . C D 6. Children l e a r n b e s t i n B. m a i n l y c o o p e r a t i v e e n v i r o n m e n t w i t h c o m p e t i t i o n r e s t r i c t e d t o c o m p e t i t i o n between g r o u p s or w i t h o n e ' s own p a s t p e r f o r manc e . C M) 7. A g o o d way for c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i s from r e a d i n g books r a t h e r t h a n h a v i n g t o ask someone or f i g u r e e v e r y t h i n g out for themselves.CO 8. A g o o d way f o r a c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i s by d r i l l i n g and memorizing information u n t i l they can r e c a l l i t instant Iy.CO 9. A g o o d way for c h i l d r e n to learn i s t o discover knowledge for t h e m s e l v e s r a t h e r t h a n s i m p l y r e a d o r h e a r a b o u t i t . CM) 10. A g o o d way for c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i s from a d u l t d e m o n s t r a t i o n s a n d e x p I a n a t i cms.CM) I I . A g o o d way for c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i s from ' r e a l life' e x p e r i e n c e s r a t h e r than formal e d u c a t i o n a l ones.CD 12. A g o o d way for c h i l d r e n to learn i s through play rather than formal e d u c a t i o n a l experiences.(L) 13. C h i l d r e n l e a r n b e s t i n an a t m o s p h e r e w h e r e t h e r e i s a c l e a r l y defined structure? w i t h c l e a r r u l e s and expectations.CO 14. C h i l d r e n l e a r n b e s t i n an a t m o s p h e r e w h e r e t h e s t r u c t u r e i s i n t h e b a c k g r o u n d a n d c h i l d r e n c a n make s o m e c h o i c e s a b o u t what t h e y a r e g o i n g t o d o a n d how t h e y a r e g o i n g t o do i t . CM) 15. C h i l d r e n l e a r n b e s t i n an a t m o s p h e r e o f f r e e d o m ? f r e e o f e x t e r n a l l y imposed s t r u c t u r e s ? r u l e s and expectations.CD 16. M o s t c h i l d r e n w o u l d p r o b a b l y spend a l l of t h e i r time p l a y i n g and l e a r n l i t t l e i f t h e y w e r e l e f t t o t h e i r own devices.CO 17. C h i l d r e n l o v e t o l e a r n what i s e a s y a n d p l e a s a n t f o r t h e m but? u n f o r t u n a t e l y ? s o m e t i m e s h a v e t o be f o r c e d t o s t u d y t h o s e a r e a s w h i c h a r e more d i f f i c u l t or l e s s p l e a s a n t . C M ) 18. C h i l d r e n n a t u r a l l y l o v e t o l e a r n a n d w i I I d o s o e n t i r e l y on t h e i r own i f they are permitted.CD 19. M o s t c h i l d r e n a r e r e a d y t o b e g i n f o r m a l e d u c a t i o n b e f o r e a r e s i x a n d s h o u l d b e a l l o w e d t o do so.CO 20. T h e t r a d i t i o n a l a g e o f s i x i s a g o o d a g e t o s t a r t formal e d u c a t i o n b e c a u s e i t i s t h e age most c h i l d r e n a r e r e a d y f o r  they  20S it.CM) 21. Most c h i l d r e n a r e n o t r e a d y a f t e r age s i x and s h o u l d n o t be until they are ready.CD  to begin education pushed i n t o formal  u n t i l well education  22. A g o o d t e a c h e r i s an e x a m p l e o f m o r a l b e h a v i o u r . CD 2 3 . T o b e a g o o d t e a c h e r o n e must b e i n t e l I i g e n t a n d b e w e l I educated i n many a r e a s . C O 24. A g o o d t e a c h e r p l a n s l e s s o n s and d i r e c t s t h e c o u r s e o f t h e child's Iearning.O 25. A g o o d t e a c h e r loves I earning.CM) 26. T o be* a g o o d t e a c h e r , o n e must h a v e s p e c i a l i z e d t r a i n i n g i n t e a c h i n g methods.CM) 27. A good t e a c h e r d o e s n ' t a c t u a l l y t e a c h - s h e / h e a c t s a s a c a t a l y s t and a r e s o u r c e p e r s o n . C M ) 28. A g o o d t e a c h e r loves c h i l d r e n . C D 2 9 . T o b e a g o o d t e a c h e r , o n e must h a v e a n a t u r a l g i f t f o r teaching.CD 30. A g o o d t e a c h e r l e t s t h e c h i l d s e l e c t what t h e c h i l d w a n t s t o Ie a r n . C L) 3 1 . What s h o u l d b e t a u g h t s h o u l d b e d e c i d e d b y r e f e r e n c e t o t h e B i b l e or B i b l i c a l s t a n d a r d s . C O 32. What s h o u l d b e t a u g h t s h o u l d b e d e c i d e d b y r e f e r r i n g t o what has t r a d i t i o n a l l y been t a u g h t . C O 3 3 . What s h o u l d b e t a u g h t s h o u l d b e d e c i d e d b y e x p e r t s i n c h i l d d e v e l o p m e n t and education.CM) 3 4 . What s h o u l d b e t a u g h t s h o u l d b e d e c i d e d b y t h e e c o n o m i c n e e d s and r e l i g i o u s a n d / o r e t h n i c i n t e r e s t s o f t h e c o m m u n i t y . CM) 3 5 . What s h o u l d b e t a u g h t s h o u l d b e d e c i d e d b y what t h e c h i l d wants t o I e a r n . C D 36. What s h o u l d b e t a u g h t s h o u l d b e d e c i d e d b y t h e person r e s p o n s i b l e for teaching the c h i l d h i s t e a c h e r , t u t o r or parents. CD 37. A l t h o u g h t h e c u r r i c u l u m h a s t o be a d j u s t e d t o i n c l u d e d t o s c i e n t i f i c d i s c o v e r i e s and r e c e n t h i s t o r i c a l events, the t o p i c s c o v e r e d and t h e s u b j e c t s i n c l u d e d can r e m a i n b a s i c a l l y u n c h a n g e d from g e n e r a t i o n t o g e n e r a t i o n . CO 38. T h e c u r r i c u l u m m u s t b e f l e x i b l e t o a l l o w t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f new t o p i c s and s u b j e c t s from t i m e t o t i m e a s welI a s new i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t s c i e n c e and h i s t o r y . CM) 3 9 . T h e c u r r i c u l u m must c o n s t a n t l y c h a n g i n g t o r e f l e c t what i s cur r ent i n our soc i e t y . CD 40. A l l c h i l d r e n s h o u l d be t a u g h t t h e same s u b j e c t s throughout their education.CO 41. A l l c h i l d r e n n e e d t o l e a r n c e r t a i n b a s i c s u b j e c t s , b u t after t h a t , t h e y s h o u l d f o l l o w t h e i r own i n t e r e s t s and talents.CM) 42. T h e r e i s n o t h i n g t h a t a l l c h i l d r e n n e e d t o I e a r n C D 43.  It doesn't  matter  whether  the  child  enjoys  a  subject,  is  good  21.0 at i t or t h i n k s i t i s i m p o r t a n t , u n f o r t u n a t e l y , t h e r e w i l l be some s u b j e c t s a c h i l d s i m p l y h a s t o l e a r n w h e t h e r he or s h e likes i t or not i n o r d e r t o become e d u c a t e d . C O 44. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d l e t c h i l d r e n d i s c o v e r what t h e y a r e n a t u r a l l y g o o d a t , r a t h e r t h a n f o r c e them t o do what t h e y d i s l i k e o r find di f f i c u l t . C M ) 4 5 . No m a t t e r how h a r d y o u t r y , y o u c a n n o t t e a c h a c h i l d s o m e t h i n g i f t h e c h i l d d o e s not f i n d i t i n t e r e s t i n g , e n j o y a b l e or r e l e v a n t i n some m a n n e r . C D 4 6 . E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d f o c u s on t h e ' 3 - R ' s ' C O 47. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d f o c u s a c a d e m i c s u b j e c t s ; t h e h u m a n i t i e s , the s c i e n c e s , maths, l a n g u a g e s and t h e I i k e . C D 48. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d t e a c h c h i l d r e n t o g e t a l o n g w i t h o t h e r s . C M ) 4 9 . E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d f o c u s on a v a r i e t y o f s k i I I s — vocational, a c a d e m i c , l e i s u r e a c t i v i t i e s and l i f e s t y l e i s s u e s Csex e d u c a t i o n , d r u g and a l c o h o l a b u s e e d u c a t i o n ) C M ) 50. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d t e a c h c h i l d r e n t o r e c o g n i s e t h e i r f€*el i n g s . C D 51.. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d t e a c h c h i l d r e n t o b e h a p p y a n d accept themselves as they a r e . C D 52. E d u c a t i o n c a n e n h a n c e c r e a t i v i t y b y h e l p i n g c h i l d r e n develop t h e d i s c i p l i n e and s e l f - c o n t r o l t h a t i s n e c e s s a r y t o be truly c r e a t i v e . CD 53. E d u c a t i o n c a n e n h a n c e c r e a t i v i t y by p r o v i d i n g c h i l d r e n w i t h o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o do c r e a t i v e a c t i v i t i e s . C M ) 54. A l l c h i l d r e n a r e n a t u r a l l y c r e a t i v e , a n d t h e r o l e o f a g o o d e d u c a t i o n i s t o make s u r e t h i s n a t u r a l c r e a t i v i t y i s n o t trampled on a n d d e s t r o y e d b y r e s t r i c t i v e p r a c t i c e s , CD 55. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d e n c o u r a g e c h i l d r e n t o s t r i v e f o r excel I ence. CD 5 6 . E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d e n c o u r a g e c h i l d r e n t o s e t t h e i r own goals a n d s t a n d a r d s a n d t r y t o meet t h e m w i t h o u t c o m p a r i s i o n t o o t h e r students.CM) 57. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d not i n f l i c t a r b i t r a r y s t a n d a r d s upon t h e c h i l d - t h e c h i l d s h o u l d d e c i d e how i m p o r t a n t a t a s k i s and the a m o u n t o f e f f o r t h e o r s h e w i s h e s t o e x p e n d on i t . C D 53. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d e n c o u r a g e c h i l d r e n t o c o n f o r m t r a d i t i o n a l J u d e o - C h r i s t i a n v a I u e s . C C) 59. E d u c a t i o n e n c o u r a g e c h i l d r e n t o a c c e p t and c o n f o r m t o t h e v a l u e s o f t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r r e l i g i o u s or e t h n i c community.CM) 60. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d e n c o u r a g e c h i l d r e n t o c r e a t e a n d clarify t h e i r own v a I u e s . CL) 6:1.. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d e n c o u r a g e c h i l d r e n t o m e e t s t a n d a r d s n e a t n e s s and o r g a n i z a t i o n . C D 62. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d e n c o u r a g e c h i l d r e n t o s e t t h e i r own s t a n d a r d s o f n e a t n e s s and organization.CM) 63. An e m p h a s i s o n n e a t n e s s a n d o r g a n i z a t i o n s t i f l e s t r u e  of  learning  and c r e a t i v i t y . C D  64. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d t e a c h c h i l d r e n author it y . CD 2 65. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d t e a c h c h i l d r e n soc i ety.CM) 66. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d t e a c h c h i l d r e n and g i v e them t h e t o o l s t o f i x i t . C  respect to  for  question  what D  tradition the  i s wrong  values  with  and of  society  6 7 . T e s t s may b e u n p o p u l a r ? b u t t h e y a r e a g o o d way t o m e a s u r e how well a c h i l d ' s education i s p r o g r e s s i n g . CO 68. T e s t s s h o u l d b e u s e d o n l y a s ' s e l f - t e s t s ' t o i n f o r m t h e c h i l d w h e t h e r he h a s m a s t e r e d t h e t o p i c . C M ) 69. T e s t s s e l d o m m e a s u r e what a c h i l d knows.CD 70. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d ' e d u c a t e ' s t u d e n t s i n a g e n e r a l s e n s e ? n o t t o p r e p a r e them f o r a career.CO 71. A p r i m a r y p u r p o s e o f e d u c a t i o n i s t o p r e p a r e s t u d e n t s f o r a career.CM) 72. A c a r e e r o r a j o b ? i s t h e b e s t education.CL) 7 3 . E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d c r e a t e p e o p l e who l o v e k n o w l e d g e and s e e k t r u t h . CO 7 4 . E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d c r e a t e p e o p l e who h a v e h i g h m o r a l standards.CO 75. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d c r e a t e p e o p l e who a r e e m p I o y a b I e . C M ) 76. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d c r e a t e g o o d c i t i s e n s . C M ) 77. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d c r e a t e p e o p l e who a r e h a p p y a n d wel I™ adjusted.CD 7 8 . E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d c r e a t e p e o p l e who w i l l improve s o c i e t y . CD 79. E d u c a t i o n c a n e n h a n c e a c h i l d ' s s e l f - e s t e e m by s e t t i n g h i g h s t a n d a r d s f o r a c a d e m i c a c c o m p l i s h m e n t and b e h a v i o u r and e n c o u r a g i n g c h i l d r e n t o meet t h e m t h r o u g h h a r d w o r k a n d selfd i sc i p I i ne. C O 8 0 . T h e b e s t way for e d u c a t i o n t o enhance a c h i l d ' s s e l f - e s t e e m i s b y r e s p e c t i n g h i s f e e l i n g s a n d a c c e p t i n g h i m a s he i s . C M ) 81. E d u c a t i o n e n h a n c e s a c h i l d ' s s e l f - e s t e e m when t h e c h i l d g u i d e s h i s own e d u c a t i o n a n d f o l l o w s h i s own n e e d s a n d i n t e r e s t s . CO 82. T h e g o a l o f ' c r e a t i n g l i f e t i m e I e a r n e r s ' w h i l e p e r h a p s admirable? i s not a p r a c t i c a l one f o r e d u c a t i o n and d e t r a c t s m o r e a t t a i n a b I e g o a I s . C C) 83. G o a l s s u c h a s ' c r e a t i n g l i f e t i m e l e a r n e r s ' c a n b e s t be a c c o m p I i s h e d b y ex p o s i n g c h i l d r e n t o a r i g o r o u s a c a d em i c c u r r i c u l u m w h i c h g i v e s them t h e k n o w l e d g e and i n f o r m a t i o n t o p u r s u e f u r t h e r e d u c a t i o n i f a n d when t h e y want t o . C M ) 84. ' C r e a t i n g l i f e t i m e l e a r n e r s ' i s a n i m p o r t a n t f u n c t i o n of e d u c a t i o n w h i c h c a n be a c c o m p l i s h e d b e s t by encouraging c h i l d r e n ' s c r e a t i v i t y a n d n a t u r a l l o v e o f I e a r n i n g . CL)  from  APPENDIX  V  INTERVIEWS  FACTOR  I : EDUCATION  Notes  The  factor  lived  the  two  answered  parents  Ioaded  in writing  at a  later  the interview  in writing.  a remarkably  with  date.  o u t o f town  expressed  most  mainland.  was  individuals gave  call  who  t h e lower  questions  phone  Montessori  'SELF-ACTUALIZATION'  homeschooIers  outside  interview  follow-up  AS  themselves  on  They agreed  this  t o answer  the p o s s i b i l i t y Similarly,  much  Fortunately, well  of their  of a  one o f t h e two  of the time  unusually  d e t a i l e d account  heavily  and  also  a l l three in  life,  writing,and  decisions  and  be I i e f s .  HS  #1  Mrs.  A.  lives  children. Catholic in  She  enjoy  my  Valentine's hated  (Grade  1-8),and  attended  she took  schooling".  Kindergarten  She  school".  Valentines Mrs.  island  kindergarten public  one year  journalism.  for colouring on  Vancouver  public  She  where  on  attended  school  Ontario.  col lege  i n a town  Day  and  A completed  her husband  and  subsequently  school  again  (Grade  o f U n i v e r s i t y and Mrs.  r e c a l I s being poorly  with  and  writes  yelled  4 and  5  a year  a t and  "Anyway,  9-13) of  "I d i d not  receiving only  writes grade  A.  and  his in two  I decided  i n one  year  I and  213 was  accelerated  friends, ignored she  her  friends.  if  you  etc.  the  a  teacher  didn't  what read  pages  -  4  essay  -  got  never  does  on e  Mrs.  g ood  A.'s  brother, upon  broke  made h e r  an  ate  i t up  and  gave  want  you  don't  in -  even  to  teaching  to  art  She  English that  had  technique  to  that  2,  2  give  do  any the  -  few being  3  the work.  an "  She  she'd  Summer_h______  and  school.  F'irst  the  for  recognition  Communion  c l a s s and  -  Mass?  "one.  count  'em,  teacher".  mother  became  a  bright  a  himself  for  his precocity.  is a  very  teacher  farce.  husband  was  Learn  what  raised  when  Mrs.  student, She you  I  1 s t Pi-  12.  children  that  to  wrote  i n Grade  read  had  learned  you  end  no  until  she  to  1 read  had  opportunities during  "I  to  the  i f she  that  felt  words If  had  grademates  felt  and  award  She  her  writes  at  she  school,  grades.  pages  alternate  was  A.'s  high  S. S c h o o l >.  an  prayers  in  but  1 syllable  boredom.  positively  ice.  and  challenging  this  in  lead  an  12  her  year  a c t u a l l y have  , 4  speeicd  in grade  them  remember  middle a  the  good  in H.tigh)  the  that  with  outcast.  change  novel  of  group  school  who  "School Mrs.  play  and  A+  demonstrating  find  most  thesaurus  one  chosen  wouldn't  not  thinking  considered  being  did  they  subject  F"or  'non-conformist'  pages  remembers  £.  eventually  'smart'  use  teacher  She  She  She  label led  grade  agemates  her.  joined  to  also  says can  i n urban  A  United  a  child.  brought  her  and  was  mother  ignore States  Her  punishment told  the and  her  rest." as  a  214 poor, to  Native  violence.  "savages', felt The to  American She s a y s  and c o u l d  the schools only  was s u b j e c t  valid  t o d i s c r i m i n a t i o n and  he remembers  not r e c o n c i l e  taught  reality  that  this  "What  i s what  books  describing  with  children  adults  Indians  reality. "know"  exposed as .  M r s . A.  i s not  b e l i e v e . Or s o k i d s  valid. a r el e d  be I i e v e . "  Mrs.  A. r e c a l I s  League  reading,  (a s o c i e t y  which  and b e i n g encourages  _oma_i__i^ Qb.i.L_I._?D> your  a  and well  s  children  recalls  education" still  Mrs.  of  school  Holt  before  influence -  her c h i l d r e n long  start  a  right  f o r them.  they  and James  t h e LaLeche  breastfeeding)  book  The  Libe_ated_Par both  books  on c o m m u n i c a t i n g  before  Dobson. having  I feel  on c r a f t s  with  your  children.  he r e a l l y  t o do  with  children.  She h a s r e a d  free  school,  other  the  Kindergarten  and  asked  "What  In h i g h  but a f t e r  S h e met o t h e r  so although  s a w how  are typical,  "tons  "John  She  about  Holt i s  understands the  but she decided  she has c h i l d r e n  as a p o s s i b i l i t y .  league,  others  with  children."  A says  homeschool  Spock  and r e a d  greatest  nature  a s many  and books  hating  impressed  and never  school,  reading  homeschooler  through  d i d i t . She d i d p o i n t  curriculum 2-year  covered  o l d doesn't  colour  any  s h e would  realised  she e v e n t u a l l y homeschooled people  considered  she though  Holt,  to  that  was  t h e LaLeche  ' o n h e r own', o u t however,  a n d number  know h e r c o l o u r s ?  from Ditto  that  1 -10  numbers.  At  dinosaurs,  kindergarten  botony  break.  What  on  Mrs.  felt  the  A  children peer  used  a  a  felt  other  parents  because  "They  still  because  they  do  not  babysitting'.  wi t h  kids."  Mrs.  A.  feels  to  become,  in  the? w o r l d ,  activities". requiring  A.  with  Montessori  power'  have  heard  and  i n the how  Mrs.  would  even  ability  be  A.  felt  not  child  been was  consider  they  parents  benefit  must  without  poor  5  ("I  homeschooIing. think  with Mrs.  b i t " , or  used like  school be*ing  enabling interested  validation  anything  a  out  homeschooling  also  or  with  has  be*lie*ve t h e y  hesitate  do  to  she  a l l children  "adult  a  for  born.  self-directed,  needing  me  subjected  i t that  i t i s done*?  into  day?"  children  to  Give  'authority figure'  children, not  not  has  first  to  all  felt  result  heavily  reading.  i s the  she  was  schooled  happy  getting  desk  and  "Homeschool i n g  bored  i s extremely  a  since their  patience.  She* f e * e l s  'brain  as  homeschooled  not  Mrs.  teacher..!  and  homeschooling  like  i n depth  understand  as  and  homeschooIing  believe-  have  daughter)  in a  were a f r a i d  wouldn't 'free  the  do  disadvantage  sitter couple  (her  painting  she  of  only  baby as  would  interests  The  she  drawing,  benefit  pursue  husband  A.  earth  pressure.  never her  to  and  age  Montessori  to  do  adult  She  give  depends  r e p o r t s . PeopIe...puI Iing  oftheir anything  approval.  it a on  their  10  the kids  from  public  school  a  1.  homeschool She  school Mrs. or  A.  Ii ves  c ompIet e I y „ "  Mrs.  A.  own  feels  interference requiring concern become says  "there i n our  t o Mrs. 'test  she  Mrs.  felt  A.  were  herself." reading?  the  family  p a r e n t s don't  harm  school  needing  their  shouldn't have  a l l the  of  no  that  who  primary  the  would  of  put  that  she  placed  i n the  top  several  o l d daughter  that  other I do  questions to a  telescopes books.  She  this  your  legislation  i s of may  some  have  to  requirement.  child  - who  of  into  keep  items.  She  school  horse  but  crazy  factor  teaches  importance She  noted  astronomy "She  ask?  she  the  more  the  that but  by  and  would  more  she  doing?  Grind  quality  interest  I'm  on  that  k n o w s much  How  learn  improving  grows  on  daughter  much  she  would  interest  i s also  "My  learning  would  How We  says  w i d e l y about  forms  ask?  her  she  read  telescope? as  alter  new  This  teacher' statements  also  not  " I f you  program.  'good  felt  children.  government  their  She  regarding  They  Current  since  was  kids.  homeschooIers  legality  can  their  space  homeschoolers..".  feels  one  time.  to  regular-  they  own  wi I I b e m o r e a n d m o r e lives  and  know  does  important  to build  f u e l I t'd b y  improvement.")  not  astronomy  know what lens  you  who  new  that  which  commented?  the  c a s e s ' a.& t o t h e  seven-year  about  A.  knows o f of  array  space'  no  many  about  registration  because  a  know  c o u n t e r s arguments your  finding  feels  don't  'need  her  and  of  our  is  sure- n o t  going  to  buy a h o r s e " .  broader  She f e e l s  curriculum  that  admits  to occasionally  tapes,  Shakespeare,  her c h i l d ' s  she would  have  broad  i f anyone  i n t r o d u c i n g something  genealogy  reading  gives  guided  such  as  her a  her but  language  and an a p p r e c i a t i o n o f her N a t i v e  her i tage. HS  #3  Ms.  B.  17  i s i n her 40's and l i v e s  i n a town  on V a n c o u v e r  currently  being  attending  college.  B.C.  grades  from  taught  teacher  math  Ms. a  teacher  realized  this  school  Ms.  that  communicating read  impression at  that  i n order  s o , I wanted  education  with  children are  public  school i n  degree i n  those  b u t " exams,  mixed  feelings;  students  who  assignment  competitiveness"  on t h e o t h e r .  I had t o be i n a c l a s s r o o m t o learn my  anything.  children  9 to  When I  t o grow  i s o c c u r r i n g a l l t h e time  with  up w i t h t h e not just  9-3  days."  B. h a d r e a d  also  o f me  wasn't  that  peers,  she had "though  i n front  realization on  on one hand,  t e a s i n g amongst  B. n o t e s  a suburban  ages  child i s  s c h o o l i n g with  who w a s p o s i t i v e  difficult  deadlines,  h e r own  children  her oldest  1 t o 12 a n d h a s a U n i v e r s i t y  a  found  her three  Her two y o u n g e r  M r s . B. a t t e n d e d  She remembers  math  Island.  a t home w h i l e  Education. kind  with  John  books  with  one's  a s S.T.E.P.  Books  a n d P.E.T.  c h i l d r e n ) and a c t i v i t y  H o l t ' s books  on h e r .  time.  such  about  schools  on h o m e s c h o o I i n g  which  (books on  books. had a  She had great  had not been  written  ™iS  When  asked  decision, decided or  about  l i s . B. w r o t e  that  private  district writes,  t h e impact  but there  positions,  teacher.  Nothing  (to  homeschool)  Ms.  B. s a i d  are  Native  mind  (such  made b e w a n t  Mrs.  B.  felt  that  you can learn  t o avoid  the greatest  o r dumb'.  interests  a t one's  homeschooIing. that  The p r e j u d i c e s  was w e l l  as; " s m a r t  most  but mentions  that  benefit  amongst  that  mentioned  children  t e a c h e r s and  f o r my  that  could  there  children  until  and t h a t  was t h e b e l i e f  i s no s u c h  thing  t o pursue  feature* o f  were  homeschool  there*  the ability  leisure* as a p o s i t i v e  i n themselves  "My  of homeschooling  anything,  She a l s o  parents  that  established".  t o learn  She f e l t  idea  disabilities, later  contact  The  children."  her c h i l d r e n  as learning  she  university  satisfactory. had  or  schools,  principal,  I ever  about  Later  of  public  school  else."  a variety  before  was n o t h i n g  Indian.  self-esteem  believed  i n my  there  anywhere  I had  whether  the particular  seemed  on h e r  as a teacher.  teacher,  t h e system  i n t e l l i g e n c e , shyness)  children  felt  classroom  her t o homeschool  half  their  that  about  than  system  was h a r m f u l  who h a d t r i e d  i e .  within was  of school  worse  " I was a t e a c h e r  school  experiences  was n o t h i n g  I live  methods,  unusual  "Though  the institution  i n which  prompted  of the local  no h e a d a c h e s .  i f they  all children  wanted  would  M r s . B. t o and  benefit.  219 Mrs.  B says  were rank  she i s extremely  as a She  10 w o u l d  each  a 3.  work  o u t s i d e t h e home?  abilities.  feels  M r s . B.  give  that  attended  before  going  on t o c o l l e g e .  government  who  say they  felt  and  subject mail  a week  there "trust  own  t h e new  they  teaching  although her t o take  i s no r i s k those  French presently  authorities  of homeschoolers, primary  thus program,  she  i m p o s s i b l e t o c a r r y out  and t e a c h e r  workload".  array.  frequently during  S h e was,  was c o n f i r m e d  enthusiastic  on h e r a n s w e r s . she c a l l e d  o f t h e page  on t h e s u b j e c t reflected  however,  t h e months  i n which t h e  to  participate  t h e i n t e r v i e w q u e s t i o n n a i r e but i n c l u d e d a  when  of Montessori  interview  count  ratio  elaborating  her a photocopy  meeting  but doesn't  on t h e f a c t o r  completed  letter  benefits  feels  i n n o v a t i o n wiI I be  o u t o f town  occurred.  not o n l y page  She  3 hours  program  t r y because  i n their  i t  #1  C. was  research  don't  homeschooling  i s r e q u i r e d . " Regarding  d i d n o t comment  Mrs.  school  a head  of pupiI-teacher  MONTESSORI  17  want  the "so-called  because  She  interference just  registration  high  and i f  and t h e r e g u l a r  confidence  not cease  child  homeschooling  Monte-ssori  lack  oldest  of  with  more p a r e n t s  or  would  happy  because and  Her d e d i c a t i o n t o h e r  t o ask t h e r e s e a r c h e r t o  on w h i c h  s h e had  s h e was s p e a k i n g  felt  her f e e l i n g s  the list  listed  to a service  s h e had sent  admirably.  the club  with the  Mrs. an  C.  i s i n her e a r l y  established  centre  area  in  in a city  on t h e l o w e r  a g e s 9 a n d 11.  mainland  lives  with  her husband  M r s . C. w a s a s k e d  educated  training  i n B.C.  public  school  school  for Grades  and  later  and taught  i n a town  f o r Grade  11  a n d 12 a t a C a t h o l i c  to  attend  in  a creative  until used she  corporal was  public  girls  of Grade  when  and p r i v a t e  subsequent  and used  she reached  more s o c i a l many  than  more  classmates".  a point  people  in addition  and n o t e d  that  enjoyed  although  that  teacher  girl's  who  well-behaved her t o  both  the  contemptuous 7,  course  schooling  schooling,  In grade  I had a l o t  M r s . C. g r e a t l y  Although  was v e r b a l l y  Grade  training  e n j o y i n g her  but noted  "a young  High  planned  her p a r e n t s t r a n s f e r r e d  punishment.  academic.  Junior  she had a s t r i c t  t o that  where  Catholic  She had  a. c a r e e r  her eleme-ntary  school  corporal  nice  and a t t e n d e d  school.  on t h e c h i l d r e n .  and t h a n k f u l  of the public  p r e s c h o o l . S h e was  7 t o 10 a n d t o o k  recalls  3 when  children,  as she i s a c t i v e  the local  t o take  M r s . C.  She enjoyed  children  boarding  urban  She h a s taken  Valley  f o r Grades  but decided  school.  principal  school  School  punishment  fearful  a n d two  i n a Montessori  She a t t e n d e d  home i n  large  i , 2, 5 a n d 6 a n d a t t e n d e d  occupation.  the beginning  Catholic  that  university  society.  style  of a  to participate  i n the Fraser  3 a n d 4.  t h e Secondary  i n a ranch  on t h e o u t s k i r t s  t h e e x e c u t i v e o f t h e Monte'ssori  Montessori  met  40's and  of the  M r s . C.  interests  notes  were  o f f u n , was o u t g o i n g a n d t o my  elementary  the social  her marks  life  had been  at  good  school secondary throughout  221 elementary aspect were 15,  school  loomed  children  not or  the  rules  She  requiring  to  description, acquired obviously  Mrs. and  C.  an  positions  possessed  subject and  intimidating erudition gave  pleasantness largely  a  on  re*sult would  the  her  being  high  expectations  She  As  the  well  notes  opportunity  unpl e a s a n t n e s s  to  nuns  as  that  (sometimes enthusiasm,  poor  For  s c h o o l i n g seemed she  experienced.  her  experiences  she  felt  our  family.  children  and  Mrs.  and  her C.  was  dignified in  high  that she  was admired  "dead  Mrs.  teaching  my  that  teachers  of  "respect  school  area  had  quality  own  was  were* " e x c e l I e n t  misbehave.  of  school,  the  enthusiastic,  some had  us.)  be  "It  peers  were h i g h l y e d u c a t e d ,  many o f  of  Throughout  sense  or  acumen.  as  that  14  girl's  i n an  They  or  of  social  to  represent  program  with  teachers  I was  them.  matter.  and  the  and  l e a d e r s h i p among  teachers  to  notes  humour.  students  of  Catholic  sales ability.  i s impressed  much  certain  and  that  raised  She  to  and  of  sense  were  in study  social  subordination  conformed  training  the  "Although  enjoyed  and  career  reader  that  f a m i l y we  interest  artistic  recalls  standards  who  take  intel ligent.  their  As  necessary  the  many  my  as  however,  appreciate the  were  for a  school  felt,  writes  r e s p o n s i b l e . " She  opted both  In  in high She  'power'and  b e l i e v e i n or  and  appropriate well."  in  teenagers.  independent felt  declined  more p r o m i n e n t .  interested I did  they  to  she* w a n t e d  C.  wood"  the  hinge*  teachers  I wanted  a  positive,  nurturing attitude  sceptical  about  of  desiring  want  them  husband for  t o educate  t o have  had  left  "how  that  children  Montessori  warp  school,  based  knowledge,  on  know a n y o n e  what  child  who  "I found behaviour  my  n u r t u r i ng  any s c h o o l  the purity  except  had sent own  where  using  answers  power  and  want  anyone t  judgement  M r s . C.  d i d not school  however, had  of caring,  In a  good  t o a Montessori  i n her c h i l d h o o d  negative  being.  don't  h i s own  taught  " I d i d n o t want  youthful  and s o l u t i o n s " ,  t o be a community  not  was n o t  she  but felt  l e d her " t o s e e  aware,  sensitive,  peopIe."  Mrs.  C. h a d r e a d  came  t o read  widely  about  about  education  child after  development her c h i l d r e n  Montessori.  S h e was v e r y  impressed  Associations  course  by B a r b a r a  - Raising Caring  given  Responsible  commented  about  read  carefully  them  adult  the " respect  were  She w r i t e s  child  spoke  she d i d not  conduct"  children  and e x p e r i e n c e " .  their  that  she f e l t  i s dominant...I  feelings  She  b e c a u s e ? she? a n d h e r  of their  himself,  I was  experience".  i n social  that  to think".  philosophy.  and s a i d  and a l t h o u g h  concerned  of the a d u l t s  I perceive  child  education  the child  my  own  ... h a s i t s p l a c e  to attend  dominate  the  faith  s h e was  would  o n my  t h e whole  t o t h i n k " b u t "what  influence  says  based  a Catholic  a u t h o r i t y which  objectionable,  our  teachers  and a s h a r e d  a wide  with  variety  and formed  o f books,  only  were i n  t h e Ad I e r i a n  Coloroso  Children.  although  "Kids  M r s . C.,  i n her  indicating  a considered  a r e Worth I t  opinion  that  letter, she had  on e a c h .  Sh  mentioned  liking  interviewees. ECE  diploma  Fitzhugh  After  Dodson,  an author  her c h i l d r e n  and her M o n t e s s o r i  began  mentioned  Montessori  training.  by  other  s h e took  She recommended  E«__£_J_„__Sm  a s t h e book  an  The  that  " t e l Is alI i n a nutshe I I".  Mrs.  C. h a d s e n t  after  two y e a r s  kindergarten helping  curriculum  appreciation  parents.  t h e dark  children  the  Montessori  previously  she r e g r e t s .  the teacher  friend'  and noted, missed  ages".  "Her a p p r o a c h  lacked  In t h e s c h o o l even  Montessori  felt  guide  she felt  from t h e respect,  by t h e s c h o o l  As a r e s u l t ,  that  when  I could see  valued,  belong."  the  "teachable  teacher  M r s . C.  who  She- f e l t  Kindergarten  some* d i s t a n c e * , o u t s i d e * he*r school.  kindergarten  the other  didn't  mentioned  of a  that  was a c c e p t e d ,  I knew we  her  a move  school  "unchalIenging"  and k i n d n e s s .  competitiveness  'friend  was  She d e s c r i b e d  as "from  son t o p u b l i c  i n Montessori  i n the classroom,  moments". school  her o l d e s t  M r s . C.  home* s c h o o l books,  sends  district,  to  especially the  and i n f o r m a t i o n  was e d u c a t e d ,  and  from  credible  a  and had  conviction.  Mrs.  C.  many.  fe-el Among  nurturing and  that  those* s h e n o t e s  of children;  weaknesses;  learning;  the b e n e f i t s of a Montessori  are* re*spe*ct, s e * n s i t i v i t y  consideration of differences,  a non-competitive  development  education are  environment;  of responsibility  and strengths  enthusiasm  and d e c i s i o n  for  making  skills:  independence  of  ski I Is;  self-esteem;  and  mentions  that  fortunate  to  her go  knowledgable "trendy". worth  on  transit  feels  and  except to  class.  These  parent  i n any  Mrs.  C.  not  plan  i s extremely on  program. give  Montessori  a  bus  and  a  while  ("these  tradeoffs  children  that  travel  school  they  they  also  themselves  precocious  that  have  have  nor are  to  friends  in  learned  to  both  benefits a l l children, do  C.  not  and  need  attitude the  feels,  any  are  but  special and  a  o v e r a l I good  of  d e s i r a b l e for  the any  environment.  happy  of  with  checking  the  Montessori  children  i n any  1 to  i f Montessori  10,  u n a v a i l a b l e , she  place  She  friends.  teacher  Mrs.  social  neither  having  positive  were  a  not  however  homeschooIing  for  that  f o r c e s the  both  carefully  "looking  scale  and  school  the  p u t t i n g her  On  school  Parents  qualities, school  consider  are  and  curriculum.  and  their  commitment,  support  the  school  i f Montessori  i t b e n e f i t s most.  wiI I i n g n e s s  after  sure  and  the  graciousness  headaches  notes  on  friends  i s not  qualities  would  She  independently  C.  the  of  they  d i s t a n c e which  public  neighbourhood  Mrs.  Montessori  feels  neighbourhood.  travel  love  independent,  C.  i t " ) are  school the  and  a  grace,  relevance  children  to  Mrs.  thought:  the  where  and  the  regular  would  school,  respect  other  choose  program  and  does  alternative were  a  program a  principal  i s authentic  10, a  regular and and  she  7.  If  program  teachers comes  first"  MrSo  C.  thinks that  they  "delegate  with  little  their  though  happening  to their  Some d o n t  care..."  thought  don't  with  parents  do not c h o s e  children's education  about  what  children? She n o t e s  to parenting  educators? popular  other  assume  that  many  s k i I Is and t h a t  understand  there  system  unnknowingIy„  don't  some p a r e n t s  and  Montessori  instructors  because  o r what i s  and t r u s t  parents  Montessori.  the play-theory  to the public  i s happening Many  Montessori  give  much  "sadly  many  i s not  o f ECE i n North  Amer i c a " .  Mrs.  C. b e l i e v e s t h e r e  might  be c a n c e l l e d . some p a r e n t s .  methods  which  ability  or achievement  value  working  a t an  Mrs.  felt  C.  "Parents  encourage  competition  that  the Montessori  S h e b e l i e v e s t h e new  attract  who  i s no r i s k  u n f a m i l i a r with  us t o v a l u e are confused  might  individual  the results  primary  children  or  program  family grouping  array  or  regardless of  by an u n g r a d e d  of the factor  may  Montessori  not yet see t h e value  pace  program  were  system. of  Those  cooperation?  benefits".  "not  s u r p r i s i ng " .  MONTESSORI Mrs.  D.  #3  was a s k e d  to participate  a s she had been  involved  i n the  Montessori and is  Society  had a l s o  been  i n her late  She  f o r many more  B.C.  i n public  years,,  She enjoyed  teachers.  ages  school  was  i n Montessori  nothing  opinion,  Mrs.  lacking  simply  Effectiveness university's  subdivision  8 a n d 12.  M r s . D. was e d u c a t e d  grade  12 w e n t  no u n p l e a s a n t  her c h i l d r e n  before  widely  Training  were  Information  child  She  Children  born  before based  When had  having more  asked which  said  with  t o send  read  about  on c h i l d  development  i f there  were  prompted  some amusement  would  encourage  child  t o the Montessori  continuation  that  her c h i l d  of preschool,  i n her  and taken a  Parent local  education.  books  than  school  was  education".  characteristics  s h e hoped  She  program  She " d e c i s i o n  her t o a Montessori  she also  school.  t o the Montessori  t o be o r d e r l y .  public  there  f o r i n f o r m a t i o n a n d h a d met a  any s p e c i a l  her t o send  who w a s  development.  had c o n t a c t e d  her c h i l d r e n  anything  of a  but f e l t  woman who e v e n t u a l l y e s t a b l i s h e d h e r own M o n t e s s o r i made h e r d e c i s i o n  f o r two  S h e knew  Montessori,  development  courses.  in  a n d h a d knew a p e r s o n  with  on c h i l d  suburb.  t o c o llege  features.  her c h i l d r e n  i n better  in a  s h e h a d no bad  i n h e r own s c h o o l i n g .  fitted  D. h a d r e a d  i n t h e P T A . M r s . D. , who  her s c h o o l i n g and f e l t  She remembers  as president  i n a newer  and a f t e r  woman who h o m e s c h o o l e d active  She had s e r v e d  generally active  30's, l i v e s  h a s two c h i l d r e n ,  years.  her c h i l d  school, she  the Montessori Although  program  recognized  program  she sent her  as a natural that  budget  cuts  Cat  that  system  time)  was  were  projects  these  cutbacks.  force  them  to  involvement said  she  pace  rather  and  She  and  than  her  also  children  in  the  area  where  going  school  five  days  skills.  Mrs.  When  asked  that  she  in  the  were  Learning  Assistance,  and  Montessori  technique*  as  he  did  not  there  was  was  integrate a  lack  desk  week  way  with  enough to and  the  teachers the  for  Enrichment of  well of  and  Montessori  like  into  physical  She  the  the a  child  felt  that  Montessori  space  for  to  the  She  D.  felt  gain  to  that social  drive preschool.  lamented was  taking  teachers  teachers day,  P.E.,  work  with  recess,  impinged  the  own  no  she  to  school  and  their  were  adequate;,  Music,  D.  would  program  French,  permitting  interested.  Mrs.  not  the  Mrs.  child  was  of  i t  daughter  d i r e c t i o n the  first  parent  at  Montessori  her  would  of  time,  her  by  periods",  there  headaches,  organization  leaving  help  for  same t i m e .  felt  that  to  take  level  "sensitive  at  would  grouping  the  She  school  affected  develop  because  lived  less  education.  to  at  in  and  Teacher-training  coming  as  a  benefits  children  long  they  the  felt  free  the  available  be  high  enrichment.  about  She  be  belief  each  happy  a  their  km.  certified  secondly.  at  3d)  district.  B.C.  should  committed  not  to  felt  family  better  was  was  the  led  D.  approximately  would  the  horizons,  children to  that  and  money  smaI I a n d  cultural  children's  was  Montessori  Montessori's  and  closures  There  felt  cI a s s e s  everyone  by  reading,  felt  commitment  believed  broaden  she  keep  impressed  early  school  being"downgraded".  pilot  was  causing  on  B.C.  curriculum children,  on  the  something curriculum and given  that that  children floor. were to  are* e x p e c t e d  Mrs.  not  D.  used  sight  was  read,  as  this  that,  as  and  phonics,  for which  was on  as no  a  last  school  parental  educators and  open  Mrs.  D.  also  concerned  i t up  to  that  some r e q u i r e more  Mrs.  felt  the  including  those  with  physical  AlI  they  need  and  that  bringing  were  Montessori  She  felt  i t works. homework  Montessori would  i f i t i s welI  learn  and  because  of  some  grades." parents the  able  to  could  method.  would  to  do,  "have  felt  alI  trust She  Although  in a  that  felt  some  rely  but-  she  felt  teachers children mental,  in  kids  from the  method  aren't  true  their  that  to  trouble  trust  that  there  Montessori,  and  because  only  Montessori  i s separate to  is  prefer i t .  However,  for  using  the  expand  some d e g r e e  concerned She  weren't.  work  teacher  had  which  have  parents  the  taught  because  board  from  them.  and  will  parents are  parents  benefit  around  and, be  that  Parents  classroom,  i n v o l v e d and  to  to  some c h i l d r e n  taught  were  method  that  the  hesitate+d  could  method  felt  dependency  because  activity  on  materials  i s designed,  district,  She  s t r u c t u r e and  mats  children  effective  further  they  on  Montessori  the  more  expertise, a  the  the  work  preferred in regular  and  cooperate,  mother.  D.  a l l children  to  equipment  i n the  that  their  the  Montessori  generally  handicaps.  that  method  more c h i l d r e n  with  and  example,  result,  expert  resented.  concentrating  a  resort. board  For  i s the  the  guidance  felt  move a r o u n d  effectively.  training  used  to  children  some  parents  parents just  229 wanted  a  superchiId.  involved Mrs.  in a  Mrs.  Montessori  D.  felt  that  parents  classroom  than  in a  D.  felt  i f the  program  blossom  like  French  Immersion  Mrs.  said  she  D.  qualified unhappy  i t by  for  my  son".  teacher,  On  a  and  s c a l e of  that  i to  homeschooIing  a  7  Montessori"  got  a  Mrs.  she  had  D.  said  daughter  but  and  the  public  Waldorf school  although the  She  the  failure  Montessori Montessori,  "a  she  moral  them  the  Both  that  classroom.  i t would  way  my  been  of  "pure  the  Montessori,  for  had  in  not  program  somewhat  teacher  'watered  life,  regular  and  daughter,  Montessori"  for was  was  French  Montessori  her not  to  the  she  meet  needs, arts  late  also considered  with  said  probably  "a  gave  and  son.  down'.  just  a  a  a n d ••  10  and  For  job".  "school  a  Immersion better  fact  She  that  felt  not  child's  i t could crafts  not the  for  the  her  conceptual  work and  culpable,  that  version".  for  p r i v a t e Montessori  s t i m u l a t i n g enough  would  the  was  some d e g r e e  bastardised  i t could  grow,  d i f f e r e n c e was  program be  with  happy  the  considered  had  teacher  is  to  regular  5.  program  although  offer  8.  school  rests  the  she  concluded  d e v e I oprnent.  felt  must  10, or  happy'  "Somewhat She  Montessori  allowed  more  has.  'somewhat  saying  qualifications a  was  were  were  public  I f Mrs.  choose  school  had  to  leave because  emotional  social  could.  opinion  school  homeschooling  their  the  that  i n her  D.  intellectual, meet  in  school  A  needs  and or  homeschooIing  parent, was  she  felt  neither  thought the  she  would  regular  kids  Mrs.  school  board  to  D.  break  send  and  do  e n t r y and and  multi-age  the  school  board  as  the  school  board  could  have  the  She  having  sets  30  of  on  otherwise  own.  regular chose and  of  not  the When  mother a  work  with  phased  out  the  be  i n the  said  the  school  cubes  are  i s not  asked  the  a  the that  i f the  new  more a t t r a c t i v e  to  she  said  "Only  to  the  home.  next  few  that  the  new  system  teacher  would  as  a  how  model  than D.  part  want  seen  they of  didn't  the  having  to  of  a  program  don't No."  that few  the  work  who  by  that  understand  parents  i f they  be  of  believed  beauty  true Montessorians.  or  D.  primary to  felt  f a i l . . Mrs.  same a s the  D.  and  to  didn't  children  the  because  crucial  board  explained  reason  Montessori  Mrs.  replace Montessori  she  felt  rather  side".  at  felt  up  she  children  the  with  She  classroom  also  them  and  set  She  school  experiment  should  felt  Mrs.  over  "likely"  She  own  too.  Waldorf  primary.  cause  thorn  She  "Not  be  ones  replace Montessori  ungraded  program  added  to  enough.  with  their  i t was  program  that  beads.  work  child  the  may  unifix  i s part  their  make t h e  better."  of  golden  materials them  noted  to  might  consistent.  'expert'  ungraded  m a t e r i a l s which  program.  sets  "a  and  supplemental  t r y to  Montessori a  or  from  her  commented  change  the  operate  type'  difficult a  would  dual  this  thought  orderly  i f Montessori  years,  resist  need  program  offering  be  probably  asked  be  'right  i t might  that  When  the  must  with would  might know  any  Mrs.  D  felt  the factor  a r r a y , was  a good  reflection  o f her  be I i e f s«  TRADITIONAL  #8  Ms.  E.  i s i n her  and  6.  Ms.  late  E . owns a s m a l I  school.  She r e c e i v e d  British  Columbia,  public  school  education  30's and  bungalow  her education  graduating  system  i s t h e mother  from  in a  four  lower  college.  on  to  non-academic  p o s i t i o n at a  week  o f f , and  i s able  program  suburb i n i n the*  h e r s e l f as a  in a  university.  therefore  from t h e  mainland  She d e s c r i b e s  woman a n d i s c u r r e n t l y e m p l o y e d  a  4  post-secondary  professional  local  blocks  t h e academic  and c o n t i n u i n g  at a t e c h n i c a l  about  of 2 c h i l d r e n ages  responsible  Ms.  E . h a s two  days  t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n school  event s.  As  a child,  Ms.  E.  loved  and  the only  unpleasant  gym  teacher.  She s a i d  having was  the only  felt  h e r own  happy She  t o do  things thing  felt  childhood  thing  public  she could  s h e wasn't she could  she wished  the social  remember  was  the conformity  a  at.  She r e i t e r a t e d  reealI  that  she didn't  her c h o i c e s  an  integral  and  that  like.  o f t h e happy  that  that  She  t h e same.  part  f o r her c h i l d r e n and s a i d  particular  a s s h e had a  her c h i l d r e n t o have  had been  aspects  o f gym  good  influenced  and wanted school  She e n j o y e d  she d i d l i k e  experiences  childhood  school.  i f public  very  school it  doesn't  that  lis.  up  they  children  left  a n d went  alternate  schools  situation  was u n i q u e  who  children. had  and  noted  lis. as  the children,  and d e s c r i b e d  that  about  into  felt  and f e l t  know  how  make  went  knew  homeschooled who  were  t h e mother  several  but f e l t  her  adopted  as  toddlers,  as being  t o have  'more  education"  from  she* h a d  like  in  problems.  i s learning  that  homeschooIing  was n o t s u c c e s s f u l  continued  of education  to  a  adopted  that  t o make  problems  the homeschooling  as they  in a variety with  about  several  Love,  of programs  Te*rrific  "MOST"-Mothers frie*nds  Montessori.  development.  lectures  placed  didn't  She a l s o  who  "Some* o f t h e be*st  Parenting  child  through  'should  She*  other  kids"  "was  i n Europe."  s h e met  children  She  She  school  of behaviour  She f e l t  enthusiastically where  people  S h e h a d a n e p h e w who  an t e a c h e r  E. p a r t i c i p a t e d STEP,  they  to the child.  "a b i g p a r t  travel Iing  to Catholic  school  wild.  her c h i l d r e n  that  went  as a r e s u l t  correspondence'.  added  expectations  was a l s o  problems,  helping  who  Catholic  decisions  parent  to high  way'.  E . knew  when  live  Ms.  E.  Own  Space  and Time,  had u l t i m a t e l y  found  such  T w o ' s a n d spoke*  She had a l s o  a t h e r MOST  her c h i l d r e n  who  on c h i l d r e a r i n g  read  put  Ad I e r  out about  a  group  their  and  books  Montessori  program.  i n the regular  program  based  o n h e r own  positive  experiences.  learning  disability  neighbourhood their  from  She  school  was  neighbours  neighbourhood  She  private  network there  that a  her  son  not  been She  friends  She  the  schools public  regular and  more  school  teachers should  the  be  and  did  heard  i n the that  the  principal  public  school  creative. were  funding.  'visible'  and  making  She  She  a  was  in  to  know w h a t ' s  the  school  the  the  idea  of  'late  year  boys'  through boys felt  the  been and  parent  and  because  i t was be  a  Montessori  have  less  felt  of  at  unwise  to  required but He  a  felt  had  her  not  disadvantage.  listened  to  her  decision.  felt  related  about  more d i r e c t i o n .  teacher,  part  a  c o m e home a t  like  should  considered  would  a  preferred  be  house  both  family  and  before  a  than  French  needed  She  heard  not  had  better  to  have  school.  were  do  She he  good  sons  She to  had  preschool  system poor  as  She  able  bought  a  might  "kids should  she  had  near  her  added  i on.  experiences  felt  be  dyslexia  suitable  consulted  and  child  dyslexic.  felt  what  programs.  She  Grade  through  to  seemed  of  sons.  from  friends  because  girls  she  by  Immersion.  risk  subject was  and  French  was  burden  and  her  community...Be  impressed  other  school  rejected  and  felt  f a t h e r was  because  i n order  considered  also  &z> h i s  neighbourhood  lunch."  She  rigid  the  than  problems  private i n the  large c l a s s e s with parents going  on.  in public They  regular too  few  schools  should  volunteers  time.  gym  t o l e t t h e c h i l d r e n and t h e school  - just  them it  know  was  I care  important  "I've already  about  what's  t o know  t o have  been  to three  going  be n i c e  their  children unobtrusively.  like  things  personally  two-way m i r r o r s  so parents  She f e l t  i n the  - assemblies- l e t  on a t t h e s c h o o l " .  t h e personnel  would  -  She  felt  and added itcould  more p a r e n t s  observe  should  get  i nvoIved.  Ms.  E.  public  felt  school,  problems. most  She  that  handicapped  nor d i d c h i l d r e n with  She d i d however,  feel  c h i l d r e n d i d not belong  really  that  severe  t h e school  in  behavioral  can deal  with  s i t u a t i cms.  felt  that  relating  there  t o change  rounded.  people  ski I Is"  and s a i d  was  gone.  Ms.  E. s a i d  curriculum, signing  who  be dramatic  in society. that  she would staffing  in  would  i n one a r e a  t h e d a y when  get involved by a t t e n d i n g  group  but lack  i f there  like  this  discipline,  raising  the school  social  g e t by  i n a II areas,  with  t o be well  s h e worked s h e  you could  meetings,  education  have  a t t h e u n i v e r s i t y where  and s p e a k i n g  a political  changes  Children  are brilliant  she f e l t  petitions,  join  c I o s u r e.  would  She noted  "seeCs)  only  severely  board  was a thre»at  of  funds, but would school  '"iO  *  Ms. an  E. 8,  was  'extremely  Montessori  homeschooler  and  she  " wants her  She  doesn't  or  because  directed"  isn't  sending  E.  great  i t for  one's  people way  child  Montessori  say  i t ' s not".  lis.  said  she  "hadn't  planned  Montessori)  but  i t ' s an  option."  her  son.  program  will  Montessori progress would  HS Mr^s.  appeal  C'Yes,  better  succeed.  FACTOR  II;  She to  me").  ungraded  felt  CHRISTIAN  to  the  She  who  a  system  because  wants  to  -  children's  and  would that  She  on  added  her  "If  i t s good reasons  elitism  children  the  ideals  "self-  the  again  learn.  Montessori  I think  i s i n her  late  i t for  primary choose  child  would  b e * l i e v e * d the* represented  program  her  beliefs.  HOMESCHOOLERS  30's  and  i s the  mother  of  for  to  #4; F.  -  of i t ,  consider  new  otherwise*  felt  to  in a  "the  her  and  them  children  added  array  knew  gave i t  homeschool  further  might She  factor  She  learned  (send  however,  people  i t did  i n an She  feels,  she  to  She  interests.  Commenting  they  younger  own  school.  her  their  everyone  though  E.  to she  children  I think  to  what  sent  the  everyone"  2.  a  influencing  following their  i s so  public  wanted  only  people  the  her  person  learn  felt  liked  rdann&r  Montessori why  other  with  homeschooling  that  kids to  Ms.  they  and  felt  want  ideas".  7  a  happy'  c  five  children  236  ranging  from 1 1/2 t o 10 1/2.  She- l i v e s i n a semi-rural  o u t s i d e a bedroom community i n t h e lower mainland.  setting  Her husband  i s a p r o f e s s i o n a l and she h e r s e l f has a B.A. from a l i b e r a l  arts  coI Iege.  She  was educated i n n o r t h - c e n t r a l United S t a t e s and attended  small-town p u b l i c school  and continued  on t o one year  a  at a s t a t e  u n i v e r s i t y and t h r e e more at a I i beret I a r t s col lege which she d e s c r i b e d as being a r e l i g i o u s l y religious college. of how she longed  She enjoyed  founded c o l l e g e but not a her education  very much and spoke  to g i v e her c h i l d r e n the same love of  l i t e r a t u r e which she had. homeschooled and f e l t  As a c h i l d ,  she knew no one who had  that her own educational  not  a f f e c t her d e c i s i o n t o homeschool  had  taken  experiences d i d  her own c h i l d r e n .  Mrs. F.  a major i n Psychology i n col lege and. when her c h i l d r e n  were young had read v a r i o u s C h r i s t i a n authors on c h i I d r e a r i n g .  She was e s p e c i a l l y  b u i l d i n g s e l f - e s t e e m and developing  (Dobson, Smalley)  i n t e r e s t e d i n aspects of a good r e l a t i o n s h i p with  one's c h i l d r e n . She had read John H o l t ' s How_Chii„__. 3_.E.§ii _ f  col lege and l a t e r  reads Raymond Moore and C h r i s t i a n w r i t e r s  MacCauley and Schafer. impression  r1  upon her.  The l a t t e r  had made the g r e a t e s t  Mrs. F. s t a t e d that her was nothing  unusual  about her c h i l d r e n ' s development which prompted her d e c i s i o n t o homeschool but that  "at age f i v e they seemed too young t o be  placed i n a p u b l i c i n s t i t u t i o n " . there- was a trend  She was a l s o concerned that  i n the p u b l i c school  system toward 'secular  humanism'  and  an  beliefs.  She  also  adding as  "a  that man  she  and  exclusion felt  did  portrayed  felt  this  be  Mrs.  F.  t he  Mrs.  F.  from  her  was  were  c r owded  school  the  age  quiet of  children felt their  her and  five.  but  the  although  F.  Homeschooling  F.  she  any  was  support  being had  said  to  she  the  but  of  did  She  such  noted  adults  adult  not  values?  values  and  guidance.  think  curriculum?  homeschool  did  she  her  knew  decided was  the  the texts  her  children  her  oldest  one  and  i t enabled for  she  this  children  She  had  been  to  a  homeschool pursuing have  group  i t .  of  a  She  homeschooled  was  reassuring?  share  study  at  the  that  who  their  to  in  to who  one  them  commented? that  parent  the  still  having  other  evolved  child  with  f a m i l i e s would  'representative'? all  send  adults.  that  that  not  impressed  had  the  group?  enjoyed  fami I y  without  legitimacy  that  around  recruited  attended  she  the  time?  event? and  children  one- who  of  of  Christian  e.  who  only  each  initially  Mrs.  at  in  of  that  been  confident  was  staying  simply  had  but  especially  meeting  and  exclusion  to  together."  but  that  parents  children  surprise  At  and  and  decision she  God  roles?  times  wer  several  that  Although  several  an  to  traditional  world  problem?  that  beliefs  was  r e j e c t i o n of  homeschooIing  group  a  cIassrooms  said  at  seemed  Mrs.  a  emphasized  teachers  mean  woman m a r r y i n g  readers  reference  there  not  that  to  of  resources.  Christian  indicating was  the  first  year.  children  and  wanted  them  to  have  a  238 Christian  perspective  si gnificant her  adults.  c h i l d r e n to  on  She  felt  of"  having  children"  for  the  follow  their  was  more  the  aquarium  that of  her  i t as  or  enjoyed  re-read were  making those  a  good  two  would  ask  model  of  she  also  to  to  i t at  to in  a  a  for  both  her  of  noted  such  with  writing  Of  think  lite*rature  to  think  a  field  of  as  them to  she not  read  felt the  spend  She  go  to  he  to  wanted.  as  course?  was  or  there  doing  on  Although  age  to  or  opportunity  there  early  tended  going  the  amusement  table  more  with  noted?  he  didn't  good  F.  and  the  spend  together  enjoyed  child  to  since  school? an  was  opportunity  Mrs.  She  the  had  i f the  there  the  children.  i t at  love  benefits  skeleton.  but  her  other-  things  i f he  public  child  them  at  she  from  school?  human  felt  get  was"  'school'  said?  introduce  reading develop  to  a  not  hersc*lf,  World.  him  may  opportunities  do  sitting  literature  introduced  to  about  would  F.  and  Science  as  events  Mrs.  opportunity or  she  were  For  Without  family  complained  and  'school.'  the  such  they  children there  visit  things  spelling trip  for or  son  their  time  interests".  time  which  homeschoo I i ng.  gratification and  life  and  the  they  same  an  hoped  and  hour  this English  language.  Mrs.  F.  felt  with  a  large  projects.  self  disadvantages  family?  She  competition child's  the  and  also  her  commented  in  homeschooling  children could  comparison  esteem  of  the  that  with early  while  other  not  were  really  she  felt  c h i l d r e n was  years?  as  he  grew  that  work the  even  on  lack  good  for  older?  group of a  competition that  her  thought  may  son  felt  that  comparing  have he  after  F.  good  relationship  a  felt  that  a  with  authority.'  felt  matter  asked  lack  "lack  a  nuts"  and?  being at  the  of  why or  child  regular  might  programs? to  teach  i f your  hyperactive?  i t may  not  Some p a r e n t s  their  socialization.  be  best  needing parents.  to  e  "Who for be  do your  an  take  never  will  b  few  system  they  homeschool have  concerned  benefit  the  and  by  were good  at  must  a  patience?  have must  hav<  parent's  beneficial years?  and  send  their  you  up  expert  was  F.  to a l l that  some'?  be  easy  Mrs. your  their  child  think  suggested  children.  of  a l l their  want  child",  to  their  added?  to  was  Mrs.  F.  child's  what  'respect  prefer  For  Mrs.  to  must  must  first  homeschool i n g  to  child?  degree".  home.  have  wished  school  might  seeing  was  success  wa  parents.  parents  teacher's  who  i n the  the  confidence  and  She  i n the  children  homeschooling  especially  Montessori they  She  age  their  features.  compete  others  parent  and  When  certain to  self—discipline  more a  couldn't  themselves  Mrs.  children?  some p o s i t i v e  F.  has  a  an  to  and  reiterated  the  most  that  feel  to  option  Others the  final  such teach  them  or  think  worry  about  questions What's  that  feeling  discouraging  them a  become. the  th  they  "drive  problem  i t as  child  firstly  children  parent  said  to  They  for a  time.  children  feature  going of  for  240 Mrs.  F.  giving  herself i t a  program  a  Although  '9'?  and  on  a  Mrs.  F.  was  as  the  were  "lunatic  she  on  "out  authorities  would  to  use  judge  children  by  would  be  i f he  time?  said and  esteem? She  that  that  that  discovering  a  them  group  child the to  to  some?  to  go?  ungraded i t would  with  would  another both  work  wanted  see The  they  primary not  Her  her  at  than  her  other  system  make  child  i t so  that  the  suspicion" viewing  taut them  the  would  homeschooIers how  of  homeschoolers  concern  each  and  i f this  be  or  that  would  particular  for  school  to  love  stops  child  can  Mrs.  at  self-  home? be  and  she  wiI I  rekindled  child.  If  F".  that  make s c h o o l her.  some  commitment.  learning  at  i s the  at  looking  Christian  him.  might  to year  interest  concern  send  of  viewing  children  i f their  would  by  that  some p e o p l e  of  children  that  regular  school.  home?  her  the  knowledge  'mutual  main  examples"  evaluate the  to  of  with  sides?  them".  send  and  homeschooling  possibility  amusement  in public  t h i n g s and  school  the  because  rather  were  environment.  wants  new  she  new  get "poor  motivation to  stated  send  they  '6'  ? some h o m e s c h o o I e r s  a norm  she  about  noted  a  with  10.  illegal  extremes  as  Mrs.F.  i to  one  happy'  Montessori  concerned  fringe"  doing  of  regarded  authorities  'extremely  giving  made  situation?  their  was  scale  being  authorities  felt  she  while  '4'  homeschooling American  said  felt  in  the while  more a p p e a l i n g  241 She* f e l t  the*  'most  representative HS  of  preferred/I east her  list  was  beliefs.  #6:  Mrs.  lives  in  a  suburban  area  of  the  children  between  G„  20' and until  was grade  12  Grade  and  Mrs.  G.  but?  because  could and  ages  not  in  her  have*  the  agreed  with  Raymond  grown-ups  the  anti-social Moore's  socialise  to  kids".  in Mrs.  her  childhood  that  she  she  "loved  play  school".  Mrs. child with  G.  said  was  she  born.  encourages  magazine  called  might  had  been  She  had  townhouse  with  public  a  G  1 when  school  in  and  was  behaviour  to  her  that  peers,  a  commented  that  the  homeschool  her  to  the  breast-feeding)  and  "Mothering".  i t was  to  a afte*r  course. at  school Mrs.  G.  "alienated  own  high  LaLeche read a  G.  on  see  proportion  only  when  League  their  column  to  hint  c h i l d r e n was  homeschool  had  Mrs.  c h i l d r e n need  with  contacted  B.C.  "anti-socialisat ion".  atmosphere  influenced  in  went  work,  feeling  the  three  institute  learning  had  of  contention  In  she  in  late  system  business-oriented  She* d e s c r i b e d  G.  and  i s i n her  vocational  divorced  an  complex  husband  schools  Grade  a  her  Mrs.  satisfaction  was  felt  a  1/2.  of  completed  finding  She  8  attended  f r i e n d s over.  felt  to  to  half  G.  mother  Having  grown-ups  1/2  for  in  mainland  the* u r b a n  partially  isolated".  "how  1  Mrs.  remembered  townhouse  lower  except  school.  12  smalI  educated  Catholic  of  preferred'  (a  book  her  in that  first  group and  their  homeschooling.  She  at  that  time  Raymond  Moore,  Mary  Pride  She  especially influenced  by  decided  was  Moore's  regular  contention  school  r ead  h i m.  When  asked  oldest  her  child  mentioned previous  felt  be  that  to  of  and  attributed phonics.  neglecting  also  felt  her  She  felt  She  reached  a  decision  had  offered  a  course  Moore  and  and  her  Shafly  Con  on  to  that from  prompted  using  her  and  and  She  valuable.  Her  husband  the  public  "HomeschooIing" was and  very  spelling  given  by  impressed.  attended  a  She  was wanted  to  local a  to  had  system  The  was  he  learned  school  slowly.  son,  schooling.  had  the  a  that  furthermore,  with  not  later  from  She  difficulty  than  want  older  decision.  and  which  She  was  daughter formal  had  didn't  children.  of  homeschool  phonics)  she  felt  Dobson.  later  but  phonics.  that  husband  James  children  daughter  h€*r  read  Jbe._Way„Home  Holt,  that  her  education  be  her  she  pressures  i t to  also 3-R's.  oldest  since  and  book,  John  said  has  comes t o g e t h e r  younger  rate  husband's  the  homeschooler  the  sex  read  of  about  she  her  the  secular to  Pride's  heard  intimated  for  school  learn  phonetically  by  anything  different  about  writer)  had  that  and  ready  the  concerned  she  a  Christian  "development  from  passing,  at  She  homeschool,  marriage  not  children  to  was  separated  in  developing might  She  homeschool.  (a  that  age".  i f there  influenced  to  not a  Learning  read and  lack was  library  local  She  her  had  read  Fair  offered tried 'art  by  homeschooIers.  various  options  development.'  herself?  she  community  help.  These  the  unable  classes  attempts  Christian  t o supplement  children  are  sports)?  science  and  felt  offer  she  her  a  group  'doing experiments  and  not  artistic  by  school  she  She  t o get  some  which  In  this  fashion?  (group  games  art?  some  eventually  Mrs.  G.  music  had  area.  1987  which  things')?  in this  in  in F'.E.  ("non-academic"?  daughter  local  and  homeschooIing.  to participate  her  daughter  approached  support  was  she  found  offered her and  agreed  she  (choir)?  French  was  you  drama.  Mrs. get  G.  felt  more  saying  that  However? with  would can want  the  i t or  them  out  extremely children 10?  from  major  benefit  really  To  of  resist would  they  their with  the  was  find  She  families the  do  this? at  Mrs.  homeschooling  can  be  All  they  don't  she  but  that  sometimes  10?  the  your  know  and  felt  a  was  time  children  a hassle  to rate  to  more  love  G.  had  homeschooIing  must  home.  this  gets i t .  t o spend  you  i t because  on  resistance  mother  opportunity  "kids  If she  the  that  elaborated  teacher gets the  t o t e a c h them  hair".  learning. give  homeschooling  accomplished  want  because  of  children.  P a r e n t s don't  happy  she  your  families  children. and  problem  i n homeschooling  benefit.  do  biggest  i n most  but  your  children  the  resistance  learning?  to  and  to  were u n s u c c e s s f u l  programs  meant  she  to help  Homeschool  able  b e g i n n i n g t o homeschool  t o e n a b l e her  Because  felt  tried  After  they  they  generally the  options  Montessori a 7  from and  1  the  244 regular  program  Mrs-  was s o m e w h a t  G.  illegal.  a 4.  She f e l t  concerned  t h e new  that  l a w may  was c o n c e r n e d  that  unsympathetic  t o homeschoolers.  jurisdiction child  we h a v e n ' t  would  school  demand  felt  that  than  t o where  Mrs.  G.  Mrs.  that  they  certain  more  the child that  t h e new  at t h i s  b e met.  compare  would  would  S h e was a l s o  goals  the child  be  made  or bad.  i n might  be "under concerned  own  Like  be i f he were  ungraded  may  f o r good  she had t o r e g i s t e r  chosen".  a u t h o r i t i e s might  felt  G.  be used  n o t be a l l o w e d t o p r o c e e d  might  school  t h e school  homeschooling  pace  She  be a  that the  and t h e  M r s . F . M r s . G.  to a  'norm'  i n public  primary system  rather  school.  would  n o t make  a t t r a c t i v e t o homeschoolers.  felt  the factor  array  for Factor  II r e f l e c t e d her  be I i e f s .  FACTOR I I I MONTESSORI Ms.  H.  #5  lives  i n a rented  ages  5  30's  a n d was e d u c a t e d  which part  Ms.  1/2 a n d 8 i n a  s h e now time  H.  lives.  basement  lower  mainland  i n public Ms.  H.  with  suburb.  school  system  i s currently  and i s i n her second  r e c a l I s Grades  suite  her two Ms.  H.  children? i n her e a r l y  i n t h e community i n  attending  university  year.  4 and 5 a s b e i n g  e s p e c i a l l y pleasant  as she  was  i n an e x p e r i m e n t a l  specially to  work  selected  on t h e i r  remembers in  grade  was v e r y  classroom send  As a r e s u l t ,  widely  by D r u i k e r s books  practice.  However,  experience  Montessori  school  "macrocosm  she felt  approach  that  She* n o t e d  while  Montessori  preschool.  on s c i e n c e ?  "at regular works  i n theory, a lot  was n o  learned.  a n d Wc*s  She f e l t on h e r talking  the  they down".  but d i d n ' t  work i n  of Montessori, t o choose  i t was a  f o r her c h i l d r e n .  Montessori  walls  than  felt  she d i d well i n  crafts  l e d her t o t h e d e c i s i o n  about  an e m p h a s i s  to  Ms. H.  There  s h e had  impression  she read  Ms. H. spoke* a t l e n g t h  is  her d e c i s i o n  to discipline.  good  s h e was  i n t h e open  although  what  rather  She  was t h e M o n t e s s o r i  development,  the child  although  t h e school  t o microcosm".  that  understand  sounded  affected  were  the ability  behaviour.  of information.  made t h e b i g g e s t  she felt  good  because  The other  on c h i l d  t o be e d u c a t e d  books  own  really  that  the children  ability,  her experience  and p i e c e s  she didn't  Montessori  her  from  academic  unpleasant  She f e l t  f o r which  reasonably  t o Montessori.  got " b i t s  impressed  Other  and t h e i r  1 as being  Ms. H. h a d r e a d  "seemed  own  of working  framework". school,  for reasonable  strict.  her c h i l d  just  classroom  was one? o f t h e t h i n g s  philosophy she  open  with  her reasons that  for choosing  at Montessori  -the children  a  schools  see dinosaurs  their  on t h e  p r e s c h o o l s y o u see* K e r mi t o n t h e w a l l s .  the? c h i l d ' s  natural  curiosity  about t h e  world. Maybe  They they  don't just  impose  Sesame  Street  though  that's the  they  should  impose  and  what  different  cartoons  and  only  to  "impart  way  characters. Smurfs  looking  for a  i n the  preschool? same  complex  the  beliefs  gained  Ms.  H.  felt  the  main  and  the  knowledge  program than for  what them  because view?  knowledge.  Ms.  d i sc: i p I i n e ? I a c k  is  are  they felt  i t was  that  competitive.  factor. learn  I t ' s kind  i n Grade  gotta  of  1 and  are  the  curriculum"  „  She  felt  cannot  keep  up  and  concluded  Ms.  felt  that  H.  some  that  Montessori  of  It  would  she  her  was who  confirm  of  science  i s not are to  given  lack  s t ud en t s.  'kick  they miss  real  need out  world  good  for  on  to  their of i d ea  i n an  where in  the  "This  I was  obvious  down'  place  included  When  advanced  'pared  the  hippie-dippie»..The  be  felt  teacher  i s more  they  crap.  s k i IIs  "The  time  i n which  for  sort  i f they  She  as  through  i s the  which  Because  fac t o r s  airy-fairy? 2  world  I t s always  be  child"  Talking to  headaches  i s alot  on  in preschool  Montessori  children.  the  stuff  than  the  Montessori  the  a  like.  experience.  framework  o f mot i v a t i n g  working... There's  to  younger. a  a  by  them  with  At  should  get  rather  like.  into  and  to  child  get  mother.  about  have  i t ' snon-competitive  classroom  ran  advantage  they  H.  the  J*S her  given  they  directly"  reading  i s normally  macrocosmic  that  by  the  things...They  then  and  she  think  communicate  knowledge  cartoon  lived  they  everyone butt'  s k i l l s  keep  these?  open  up  they  to  they  i s competitive".  a l l children  but  247 not  in  a  '7-year  different  environment.  elementary didn't need  grade  need  love  of learning  keep  smi I i n g "  Mrs.  H.  felt  Montessori children "little  horrors".  thought  people  felt  'turned  c omp e t i t i v e  She  felt  because  that there  H. s a i d a  i t in a  itself  hesitated  She f e l t with  into  that  children  parents  - i t may t a k e  their  - and  children to  the regular  programs  reports of and were  of the preschools  was  that  felt i t  some p a r e n t s  misunderstood asked?  Montessori  she agreed  a more c o m p e t i t i v e  o f f by t h e c l a i m  years  from  When  might  for indefinite  'bad p r e s s '  amusement  needed  the child  c h i l d ' s c u r i o s i t y and  t o send  the cost  Some p e o p l e  later  i n t h e sand your  to a  of a cooperative  while  some  environment non-  e n v i r on men t .  were n o t happy  Ms.  that  i t was e l i t i s t .  that  suited  She f e l t  head  i t was g e t t i n g  and noted  others  were  faith  manifest  some p a r e n t s  "toostructured".  and  your  who h a d t r a n s f e r r e d  prohibitive  on  t o have  because  a r e more  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s but that  t o keep  will  kids  be b e n e f i c i a l .  any s p e c i a l  You have  Some  liaybe e x p e r i e n c i n g  might  "a w i I l i n g n e s s  periods.  was  dose'.  people might with  homeschooled  be no r e l i g i o u s s c h o o l t h e school  s h e was s l i g h t l y  10 p o i n t  scale?  f o r r e l i g i o u s r e a s o n s and  while  nearby  or because  they  system.  happy  giving  with  Montessori?  the Tradition  giving  program  i ta 6  a 5 and  248 homeschooIing if  her  that  H.  up'  no  Ms.  H.  phased  was  turn  people the  new  Montessori isn't  towards  favour  as  i s current  H.  of  felt  vogue"  or  i f they  " daughter bad  the  i t .  other  as  to  she  of  aren't  i f the  Otherwise,  i s " but  to  be  public she  "although  happy  i s reasonably  seem  schooling  curriculum,  teaching  doesn't  type  in  bright will  and  consider  progressing. school  felt  can  had  i t was  Ms.  a  large  better  for  children.  whether  felt  the  Montessori new  , i t remained  program that  was  i n danger  might  "lure  currently  of  being  people  they  had  to  away.  in  Ms.  with  i f she  Montessori"  Montessori going  While  up  her  to  another  keeping  of  how  consider  homeschooIing  with  unsure  from  chose  be  out.  felt  matter  component  away  She  out  program  to  would  not  felt  consider  religious children  were  She  regular would  She  i s going  Montessori.  the  3.  children  term  'catch  a  program but  that  working,  Montessori 'magnet  appeal  to  other  she  herself  was  not  I want for  factor  an  parents  preferring  She a  and  was  dual  represented  her  the  not,  track  #43.  array  who  impressed.  alternative  everybody".  schools'  in Distr ict  the  might  views.  might "If  system  is  however, system  such  TRADITIONAL  Mrs.,  #2  I, h a s t h r e e  husband  i n an newer  school.  Mrs.  England sense)  children,  school.  Her  i n order  family  that  moved  her.  She wrote  school  until  t h e end o f g r a d e  there  was  never  best.  any d i f f i c u l t y  take  Although she found  struggle".  S h e knew  Mrs.  I.'s school  structure subjects. practical that  school  She  such  some  she g e n e r a l l y  which  was  enjoyed  perceived  experiences  such  h e r own  should  education  emphasis  that  t o excel  in that  and do  and t h e exams " I t was  a poorer  her that  not a  her c h i l d r e n t o education.  children  a variety  h a d h a d some  as e l e c t r o n i c s or woodworking  theoretical  drawbacks  question  had sent  learn  never  school  an e x p e c t a t i o n  school.  to offer  convinced they  was  a  grammar  she noticed  the g i r l s  without  who  a  but  h a d some  boys,  teachers  o f one n e i g h b o u r  She wished  the strong  there  program  she found  t o l e a r n and t h a t  skills  with  t o attend  an a l l - - g i r l s  a school  in getting felt  an a c a d e m i c  unpleasant  Catholic  attending  was  American  to the  supportive,  and a t t e n d e d  12. T h i s  her  was i n  t i n the North  be a b l e  was  with  the neighbourhood  the countryside  family  h e r 11+ e x a m s  and S c i e n c e .  students  their  h e r own  i n learning to socialise  Mathematics all  felt  she f e l t  public  from  lives  Her e d u c a t i o n  s h e and her b r o t h e r  pushed  especially  She  an u r b a n  school.  although  from  I. i s i n her e a r l y 40's.  better  and  i i , 8 and 6 and  home a t w o b l o c k s  where s h e a t t e n d e d  suburbs  ages  need of  emphasis as she  of her s c h o o l i n g  on  felt  was n o t  enough. school  She n o t e d as they  England  Mrs.  classes  books  Dodson.  She r e a d  she  was u n a b l e  and  most  immersion and  that a  because  children  Mrs  I . commented they  decide  they  of the l o t " .  effective"  so  don't  that  and used  a s a n i mmi g r a n t  and  as  Canada,  o f her extended Mrs. I read  Fitzhugh  them  to  really  She d i d not  family  nothing  school  like  f o r young  functioned  for themselves a grounding  she found  public  welI  didn't  what's  what  school  While  know  going  just  French children  in English and b e l i e v e s  t o Iearn  i snot  i n t h e b a s i c s t o be  the teachers  the principal.  parents know  and p u b l i c  t o be t o o u n s t r u c t u r e d  She found  liked  that  typical,  they  "need  She s a i d  and  t o some a s  and e n j o y i n g  development  i t was s t r e s s f u l  she found  idea because  obnoxious  reading  alternative.  be a s s u r e d  well-educated".  left  by t h e p r e n a t a l  her response  childless.  were  she f e l t  Montessori  good  were  had  private  phi Iosophy.  the logical  letting  suggested  the experience  her c h i l d r e n  i t should  first.  on c h i l d  to utilize  to  attitude.  gui deIi nes because.  educ a t i onaI  like  that  s h e remembered  books  her c h i l d r e n  and s h e and her husband  She d e s c r i b e d  of her f r i e n d s  I. f e l t  not send  on c h i l d r e a r i n g  although  ' r u l e - o f - 1 humb'  seemed  from  she attended.  "sceptical"  Mrs.  she would  are e l i t i s t  t o g e t away  I. read  about  that  what  on w i t h  to.be  t o be  "least  "mostly  discussing  keen  this?  the curriculum their  child.  was  She  felt  s c h o o l - and  would  be  their  c h i I d' s  Mrs.  I.  covering  a  change  and  always  be  other  There  t r y new  discourage  or  f or b i d  crafts,  -  Mrs.  A I t hough  I.  to  through  handle greatest school  good  unchanged  could  monitor <  system that  she  tries  they  added  there  school  that  were  to  are  that  feel  nothing  the sh e  that the  "system feIt  read  their  give  willing  this  were not  and  the  to  might  not  any  problematic  parents  like?, ar en' t  be  school  may  encourage  encourage  p a r en t s  the  to  public  principal  doesn't  t ha t  expect  regular  d e a l i n g with  for the  in the  the  bright  traditional  child  can  help  she  felt  parents with  there.".  partners  with  She* teachers  much".  that  the- v e r y  and  Although  shouldn't  too  have* some* p r o b l e m s  when  their  parents  not  be  children  better  so  what  too.  parents.  "Parents  that's asking  did  education  of  listening  added  She  to  year  school  education  I.  parents  e ffect iveIy.  public  participation  learn  school  in public  Mrs.  them".  "children  the  best.  of  to  demanded  or  also  the  forms  the  tell  things although  problems  seemed?  system  that  should  mor e  well-rounded  for  particular  during  p r ogr e s s  thought  children  for  teachers  child  the  will  i n the  learning  better.  greatest  program  program  "They  number." probably  f o r e s e e a b l e * future* and  She  public  school  d i s a b l e d but  may  have  of  to  think  b e l i e v e s the  remain would  the  public  relatively  attend  may  meetings,  sign to  oppose  she of  petitions a  would an  or  speak  change  raise  'action'  she  funds group,  with felt  her  local  strongly  but  said  not  a  about.  should  leader  school  would  and  board  i n support  or  She  d i d not  only  become  a  join  political  would  not  know i f  a  member  group.  Mrs,, it  I,  an  i s "somewhat  8  out  of  homeschooIing she  a  "wondered"  opined  that  10  while  1 out why  i t may  child  i s different  noted  that  related  talc*  of  parents  a parent  sound  that  though  they  they  have  a  religious  The  "parent  Mrs.  I.  lead  her  She  could  felt  to  attractive trying  to  not  place  the  a  new  could  a  bias has  were a  lunch  using  do  from  of  laughingstock".  they  home.  form  their  i n some way  ecologically  at  a  "in thing"  carry  a  as  be  the  a  a  any  her  child  a  4  or the  paper  and  out  of  that  to  Mrs,  says  Montessori,  She  "believe  child".  bag  -  or  they  than  i t was  She  they' I I get  and  matter Mrs.  unknown a  who  more  "doesn't  an  their  six child  for homeschoolers? job  and  ecology-minded five  give  I.  they  average  would  10  education,  k i t because  As  system  children  grade  lot of  see  of  very  better or  school  Montessori  sent  child  child's  10  the  people  the  the  with  giving  of  Montessori  the  insisted  happy"  better  that  I.  felt  person  or  education  self-confidence."  "reasonable  circumstances"  in Montessori  primary  program  might  to  Montessori  parents  or  make  i t more  flexible.")  or  that  homeschool  make p u b l i c  would  them.  school  more  h o m e s c h o o l e r s . <! " T h e y ' r e and  that  most  traditional  parents like be  would  be q u i t e happy.  i t because  she l i k e  t h e ungraded  successful at the local  teachers  Mrs.  were  I. f e l t  TRADITIONAL  the factor  the local  school  education  larger  influenced  want  When  and t h e  well.  and completed  Grade-  as being  not r e c a l l  i t was  attended  stricter.  her c h i l d r e n  s e e any need  go t o s c h o o l  h e r own  with  children  their  her concern  anyone private  She f e l t only  f o r changes  t o go t o p r i v a t e  12.  the only  school  friends  who  at going  pleasant  homeschooled  i n that  rather  than  to  unpleasant  h e r own  because  urban  Mrs. J .  school.  although  school  t o an  any p a r t i c u l a r l y  S h e d i d n o t know who  four-cIassroom S h e went  school  home  Mrs. J . ' s  classes'.  and remembered  friend  i n a newer  Mrs. J . ' s i s i n her  3 t o 13.  her d e c i s i o n s f o r her c h i l d  and d i d n ' t  should  from  i n a rural  'split  she does  that  range place  secondary  she had a  and a daughter.  education  events.  impression  happy  took  school  Otherwise  although  sons  a l l c l a s s e s were  unpleasant  the  three  elementary  event. or  two b l o c k s  for secondary  much  the principal  from  3 0 ' s and her c h i l d r e n  the  i t would  #9  late  enjoyed  she would  felt  her b e l i e f s  her husband,  centre  because  She  reflected  with  which  aspect.  array  J. lives  in  school  she 'supposed'  behind i t .  Mrs.  elementary  She s a i d  She* g o t schooling  s h e was  quite  she d i d not she though be  they  bussed.  w e r e smaI I . M r s . J . r e c a l l e d g o i n g  to the  library  a l o t and  remembered  reading  them,  you  about  educ a t i on.  When  her  deciding order  other and  had  French  r o u t i n e and be  children heard  to  "common  against  would  has  use  were  traditional way  to  a l l the  James Dobson  children  and  French  reading  too the  ready  like  program.  school,  a  change. Mrs.  always  liked  fact  school  the  school.  academic  was  useful, by  When a s k e d that  She  J.  was  after  not  read  Mrs.  J.  older  going  aware but  reading  anything  recalIs  child  on.  decided  Montessori  her  in a  She  to  of  liked felt  treat  the  homeschooling,  prefers  the  p u b l i c school  to  be  the  was  that good  the  local  are)  OK  on  She  the  and  that  to  are  Mrs.  kids  might  on  more  Her  going  the  instance,  thought  still  options,  i n school  child.  "They're i f they  other  for  emphasis  thing.  comments  to  J.  liked be  sports  more and  discipline  remarks  could  be  get  an  education  free  to  be  themselves  c om f o r t a b l e s i t u£*t i o n . " .  what  although  a  system  private schools  depending  anyway... (opt i o n s Iear n  the  felt  thought  events be  that  She  but  summarized  an d  was  She  go".  regular  might  her  considered  p u b l i c school  social  did  because  know w h a t  Comparing  the  enter  rearing.  i n general  to  b i t about "I  felt  child  She-  to  of  on  sense'.  s a m e way. a  but  Immersion  much  quite  books  public  you  don't  schools have  to  demanded  of  parents,  participate,  parents  Mrs.  J.  should.  noted E3he  255 felt  that  (ie.  the  read.  When  asked  get  parents  Mrs.  J.  She  of  children  get  that  two  would  be  and  the  "I  see  a  that  in  felt  strongly would  would  J.  or  about  or  in  i f she only  her  describes  the  extra  help  and  kids  get  benefitted  "Maybe y o u they're  to  reduction but  would funds  but  political  say"  really  school  felt  can  get  be  and  not  action  the  attuned  to  this  wrong  the  the  and  wrong".  and  in  concluded  She* s a i d schools  sign  speak  with She  the noted  that  the  maybe*  matters  she  petitions.  possibly  and  discipline  school previous  trips  group.  closures,  with  in  change  meeting  were  lost  whether  field  would  i t was in  in  children.  schools  She* n o t e d  to  or  most  pretty  I could  attend  involve- h e r s e l f  own  felt  opposition  raise a  J.  "hard  change  she  join  p a r t i c i p a t i o n , Mrs.  e f f e c t i v e the  days  certainly protest  curriculum  Mrs.  of  children  dramatically.  resultant  probably  board  involved  how  i t was  drastic  support  would  to  changed  cutbacks  She  as  that  they  to  the  as  things  listen  school  these  thought  she  public  I think  J.  boring  satisfaction.  but  Mrs.  such  work,  problems.  problem."  school  their  a l l the  do!"  from  special  of  "do  to  with  kind  She  from  minds  -  can't  gains  the  to  want  personal  shuffle  system  who  breaks  felt  was  were asked  teachers'.) d o n ' t  teachers the  parents  staffing. i f i t  children.  herself  as  'somewhat  happy'  with  her  choice  of  schooling  and  Montessori  a  asked  why  5  she  suggested think  gives  first  What it  I see  to  would  -  I'm  their  through  she  they  and  homeschooIing  people were  chose  "not  for?"  sure  program  in Montessori  follow their  on  rather  not  own  homeschool  and  than  'doubts'  of  , Mrs.  can't  see  my  kids".  "more  for  do  a  i f she  you  method. and  Mrs.  would  do  thought  project  taught."  When  She  the  the  J.  "I  —  10,  10.  "What  own be  of  asked  teach  i s k i d s more their  out  1 out  When  responded  I couldn't  children  a  8  homeschooling  happy".  she  and  J.  send  see says  her  child  Montessori.  When  asked  though  about  i t might  Montessori  and  the  January  although  she  felt  that  the  thought  the  did  like  not  would  have  child. could  She see  make a  J.  babies  ungraded  the  idea  the  of  agreed  might  like  alternative  idea  of  how  the  decision  that  sounded  'magnet  the  about  a  the  dual  like like  a  systems  track' system  their  entry big  was  she  system  good  child  parents  where and  should  represented  although  sent  school  her  and  She  thought  worked  of  mix-up"  they  the to  parents  Montessori.  when  array  attractive  thought  decision  other  indicated  She  as  'dual  J.  more  schools'  where  factor  Mrs.  school  parents.  uninformed  more r e a d i l y  better  public  system  having  make a n  liked  program,  p e r s o n a l l y " I t sounds  i d e a of  to  primary  homeschooIing  and  noted  new  make r e g u l a r  December  Mrs.  traditional  10  I o o k i ng  homeschooling put  of  thought  they're  people  out  the  their parents  thereby be.  beliefs.  FACTOR  IV  TRADITIONAL Mrs.  K.  house K„  lives  with  who  r  two  her  husband  Mrs.  K.'s  K.  education.  her  30's?  in a  own  hoped  two was  i n one  mother  the  neighbourhood  one-room  primary  that She  and  the  grandmother  her  felt  from  early  initially  although  Mrs.  block  rooms w i t h  other. and  one  i s i n her  Columbia? to  #5  had did  mother her  completed  her  Mrs.  K.  liked  family grouping  teachers often  who  good  isolated having noted  three  choose  teachers  areas  an  are  any  to  Grade  Mrs.  knew  much  of  their  a  system  teacher  K.  7  at  the  noted  student schooling  who by  the  not  to  area  impart  would  but  i n the have  a  a  teacher?  year.  An  school  high  to who  go  She  to  isolated E3he  felt  are  grades  her  and  that  remembers and  which for  unpleasant  French  too.  to  by  the  of  school.  teach  'newness'  and  love  lamented  method  each  the  education?  primary  subjected  i n an  in  schooling  school  teachers  correspondence.  expanded  h£*r a  smalI  the  lived  to  in a  i n which  loved  EJritish  as  love  loved  she  Mrs.  extensive  she  high  6.  school  profession.  should  new  had  an  i n the  are  that  the  have  teacher  of  to  to  rented  intermediate  education  of  beginning  was  K.  dregs  unpleasant  a  come  sometimes  how  the  Mrs.  that  commented  at  isolation.  but  and  environment  She  everything moving  rural  ungraded  dislike  years.  a  secondary  the  unusually  that  children  the  This  room  in a  and  school.  children  K.  4  i n rural  tried  Mrs.  age  educated  not  had  own  children?  school  or  of memory  sense hated  area  two  of Math.  and  done  homeschooIing  Mrs.  K.  remembered  children she  was?  i n fact?  reading  and had a book  found  useful.  a viable  books  option.  on c r a f t s  t o do w i t h her  c a l l e d y__„be_Year  She had not r e a d  which  anything  on  educational  matters.  She  felt  h e r own  children  were  that  she l i k e s public  with  and she can g e t ' i n v o l v e d ' .  of  public  school  would  grouping.  "Everything  concerned  that  teacher  the  public  schools  gifted  children  public  schooling  may may  felt  t h e new  felt  'stuck'  with  be p r o b l e m s  the  with  family  unsympathetic  M r s . K.  off.with  benefits  S h e was  incompetence  with.  b u t was c o n c e r n e d  with  i f the teachers  teacher  be b e t t e r  she i s f a m i l i a r  system  an  and s h e noted  t h e main  project".  had t o deal  might  i t i s what  a group  be  that  'typical'  M r s . K.  from  becomes  there  She a l s o  because  come  a child  or t h a t  program.  school  basically  resent  was  felt  a  the  problem  exceptionally  private  tutoring  'excluding  them  than  from t h e  c ommuni t y ' .  When  asked  why  she thought  Montessori  or homeschooIed  Montessori  might  of she  a  friend  who  suggested  their  be a was  that  'precious'  people  sent  she r e p l i e d  'status'  option. keeping  homeschoolers  might  to society  that  children  to  she thought  Drawing  considering  children  their  on  her c h i l d be a f r a i d  including  her out of  of  knowledge school,  exposing  TV, c e r t a i n  types  of  toys.  She  or  later.  felt  Mrs.  ch i I d r e n  K.  noted  conservative  Protestant  religionists  who  protect  from  groups  them of  parents  competition learn that  to  but  cope  she  sent  children  wanted  peer  not  excel?  but  effectively  i n any  program.  homeschooIers that and  by  monitoring  for  She  have  Mrs.  K.  giving  was  because  She  felt  she  know e n o u g h  felt  could about  Christian  schools  also  children  she  with  program and  felt  for  right  felt from  that  child to  that  put  both and have  She  do  but  the  should  that  She  also  monitor  scepticism that ultimately  on  i t equally  government  could  to  noted  pressure  homeschool.  are  to  children  neglect  educators  parents  that  co-  pressure  could the  (ie.  her  competition.  they  indicated  happy'  the not  i t .  to  they  isolated.  alternative  a  Christian  to She  soon er  noted  'trends  that  would  accountable  educ a t i on.  returning were  a  homeschooIing she  She  that  'somewhat  both  a  with  and  parents  homeschooIers?  concluded  c h i I d r en's  the  watch  discontent' although  happen.  10  should  the  to  was  i f i t i s undesirable?  pressure  i t was  she  disagreed  world.  protect  soc iet a I p r e s s u r e  she  children  to  even  homeschooIers  f ac e  Christian)?  to  monitor  to  although  outside  again  believed  that  their  the  with  had  rural  program  with  and  the  "subject  the  regular  traditional i s only  rate Montessori Mrs.  life She  K.  said  and  would  would  send  i f the  child  she  as  her  wanted  go.  an  the  because  8  out  did  When  not  of  children  to  of  teacher".  she  dreamt  her  children to  as  often  homeschool  system,  program  good  fairly had  school  i f  an asked  about  whether to  she  make a  new  felt  prediction  primary  concerned She  that  would  teachers?  help  involved added?  in  i n any  threatened  for  several  week  On  the  that  the  the  to  or  different  people".  about  curriculum  in  the  the  place  generation. pr oc eed  t oo  the  ethnic  of She  political the  the  Mrs  K.  qui ckIy.  noted  teach as  noted  that  curriculum there  would type  by  that  of  to  would  changing  should  be  She  itself  was  She  change?  felt  in  the  the  might.  She  based  Montessori held  strongly  conform  from  she  action.  agreed  ' c o n s t a n t l y ' and  parents  become  meeting  was  was  said  changes  "builds walls she  the  sabotage i t .  not  some  she  of  upset  system  the  unwilling  but  herself?  parents  children  this  might  information  interview.  changing  felt  an  was  approval  involved.  shown  our  values She  at  K.  success  school  Montessori  enthusiasm  shou_d_not  religious  but  i n f l u e n c e d by  program  array?  education  be  that  new  prior  factor  not  but on  funds  felt  a  She  become p o l i t i c a l l y  would  conclusion  or  her  changes?  change.  raise  i f she  be  Mrs.  resistance could  with  the  school?  would  i f could  unhappy  much-  indicated  parent  petitioning  program  parents  and  change  she  felt  resist  that  she  homeschoolers  this  to  the  however  primary  and  teacher  parents  would  however  program  thought  causing  schools  to  with  their  between not  would  enthused have  generation but  put  i t  to  i t should  not  TRADITIONAL  Mrs.  L.  #6  lives  neighbourhood to  i n a new home school  with  public  school  in  12  and has post-secondary  was  ' n o t an e n t h u s i a s t i c  sciences? math  'useless'.  help  good  cooking?  teachers cousin  student'  up a f t e r  Otherwise?  and r e g a r d e d  Columbia.  to Catholic  own  schooling experiences  should  school  and t h e i r  t o have  more  mark  out her c h i l d r e n ' s developmental  had r e a d  wouldn't  a book  on c h i l d  she gained  two a r t i c l e s  who  took  time  some c l a s s e s a s b e i n g  event.  She had a  not feel  t h i s had  her c h i l d r e n . children  Her  should  s h e had but a l s o  i s beautiful?  development  She f e l t  go a t your  which  milestones  from  have that  she used  roughly.  her nursing  speed"  was  to She  experience.  and "decided  the "constant  own  a  "superinspiring"  say i n the decisions that  on M o n t e s s o r i  go t o M o n t e s s o r i " .  everything  teacher  finding  education.  L. had r e a d  She  and  but she does  Mrs.  t h e knowledge  enjoying  a social  s t r u c t u r e than  Grade  Mrs. L. s a y s s h e  s h e had no  as mainly  3  in a  French  l e d her t o believe-  a n d more  be a I lowed  them  utilized  training.  a Chemistry  ages  She completed  o n h e r d e c i s i o n s o n how t o e d u c a t e  more e n c o u r a g e m e n t  children?  a n d remembers  she f e l t  effect  affect  and t h r e e  s h e had missed  school  from t h e  a n d was e d u c a t e d  vocational  any  they  British  She remembers  who went  30°s  blocks  and s p o r t s and d i s l i k i n g  her catch  teacher.  four  her husband  10. M r s . L . i s i n h e r e a r l y  suburban  to  about  my  children  do-good? unrealistic  and  that  there  children  was  oldest  need  nothing  child  was  unusual  about  diagnosed  She  now  for  him.  She  chose  public  the  cost,  and  while  she  formally,  she  tapped  other  Mrs. it  wonders  more g u i d a n c e .  i f private  alternatives  L.  felt  that  the  and  the  children  with  disabilities  that  biggest  headaches  that  I ear n  was  covered  too  too  suggested year  of  school  quickly  schooling  children  good  with  wi I I d i s r u p t one."  She  another  felt of  and  that  some  of the  Montessori  because  they  can  other and  her  disability. better  option  because  of  options  considered  the  school  that  kids.  disabled of  class  was  so  information  peripheral  with  or  so  the  -  the*y'd  need  Toward  gifted the  might  be  go  their  end  good own  of  for  She  the*  some  pace,  another  public of  more may  to  was  those  disruptive  child  also  supposed  adding  exception  that's  extremely  She  it  thought  -  class  The  overload."  L.  the  were  from  also  si_e.  much,  items  Mrs.  was  children.  children  there*  was  everyone  She  disorders  at  a  integrated  bright  graduation.  education.  later  school  public  and  result  get  all children  rest  of  curriculum  "kids  before  felt  of  a  Because  'behaviour the  very  was  that  been  private  initially  them.  children,  the  dropping  for  also  form  commented children  she  have  network'  benefit  to  but  that  learning  investigate  physically  extensive.  either  was  of  i t accepted  the* b r e a d t h  over  biggest  kinds  mild  school  rejected  all  a  might  'parent's  with  pleased  having  not  said  children  school  did  dealt  felt  as  her  Mrs.L  that  i t  one-to-  benefit interview  from she  handicapped i f they  never  have  t o deal  with  Mrs.  L.  parents  felt  unfortunately time. many  teacher  Mrs.  a n d t o o much  L . was  regular  with  learning  happy"  parents  Montessori  case  of Montessori,  (.or w a s ) w e l l the  way  what  they  Mrs.  L. s a i d  an her  child  option private two  the  she would region  teacher  When  o f each  asked  to  homeschool  with  school  why  of  but their  their child  aretoo forthe  there  they  She- t h o u g h t  showed  other that? i n  intelligence...  homeschoo I e r s religious  only  no s c h o o l s she felt  didn't  like  b e l i e f s or  and c l o s e r  might  n o t be any b e t t e r .  have  i f she lived i n  but would  tutoring  disabilities  had any b e t t e r they  3 and  learn.  were  learning  Montessori  she suggested  her c h i l d  She s a i d  and-gave t h e  she though  due t o t h e i r  i f i t was c h e a p e r  would  give  because  giving  She thought  children  where  a s t o whether  school.  public  "Maybe? t h e c h i l d  to Montessori.  school  demanded  with  children  their  for children  minds  public  teach  expect  isolated  parents  or homeschooIing  motivated".  school  t o the school  and cannot  a 7 o u t o f 10, w h i l e  1 o u t o f 10.  the  work  needed  homeschooling chose  something  alone.  "somewhat  program  give  parents  the school  t o cope  world.'  should  t o o many  She f e l t kids  the 'real  not  send  was a n  and would  consider  although  s h e was o f  solution  than  smaller  didthe  c l a s s e s but  Change? She  Mrs. L.  felt  would  felt  should  would  actions;  attend  meetings?  school group  board  primary and  and Mrs.  that L.  raise  with  program  make  parents  She  this felt  would  felt  funds?  made  an  'action'  array  t o be  or  changes  position i n the  t o homeschoolers  herself  as  "worried  information  her  with  political  enthusiastic.  represented  speak  an e d u c a t i o n a l  i f the proposed  was n o t e n o u g h  suggested  petitions?  i t more a t t r a c t i v e  i t difficult  the factor  sign  but she d e s c r i b e d  there  not be t o o d r a m a t i c .  any o f t h e  or s u p p o r t e d  M r s . L . d i d n o t know  i t . "  t o take  o r become i n v o l v e d w i t h  Montessori  about  be r e a d y  i f she disagreed  strongly.  come b u t i t w o u l d  beliefs.  available  2G5 APPENDIX FACTOR FACTOR MOST L I K E  MY  ARRAY  VI  ARRAYS FOR  FACTOR  I  BELIEFS.  1.. C r e a t i n g l i f e t i m e I e a r n e r s i s a n i m p o r t a n t function e d u c a t i o n w h i c h c a n be a c c o m p l i s h e d b e s t by e n c o u r a g i n g n a t u r a l c r e a t i v i t y and l o v e o f I e a r n i n g . (84) 2. A g o o d way for children to themselves r a t h e r than simply good  teacher  loves  l e a r n i s t o d i s c o v e r knowledge r e a d i t or h e a r a b o u t i t (9)  3.  A  4. by  T h e b e s t way for education t o enhance r e s p e c t i n g h i s f e e l i n g s and a c c e p t i n g  learning  a child's him a s he  10 E d u c a t i o n truth. (73)  l e a r n b e s t i n an is a v o i ded. (5) should  he/she  self-esteem i s (80) acts  as  s e t t h e i r own comparison to  create  children  to  atmosphere  people  who  of  love  create  and  goals other  guides (81)  clarify  cooperation  knowledge  is  a  a c h i l d ' s s e l f - e s t e e m when t h e c h i l d f o l l o w s h i s own n e e d s and i n t e r e s t s  8. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d e n c o u r a g e t h e i r own vaIues.(60) 9. C h i l d r e n c ompet i t i on  -  should encourage c h i l d r e n to a n d t r y t o meet t h e m w i t h o u t  7. E d u c a t i o n e n h a n c e s h i s own e d u c a t i o n and  by  (25)  5. A g o o d t e a c h e r d o e s n ' t a c t u a l l y t e a c h c a t a l y s t and a r e s o u r c e p e r s o n . (27) 6. Education and s t a n d a r d s students. (56)  of a child's  where  and  seek  11. A l I c h i l d r e n a r e n a t u r a l l y c r e a t i v e , a n d t h e r o l e o f a e d u c a t i o n i s t o make s u r e t h i s n a t u r a l c r e a t i v i t y i s n o t d e s t r o y e d by r e s t r i c t i v e p r a c t i c e s . ( 5 4 )  good  12. A g o o d way f o r c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i s from ' r e a l life' e x p e r i e n c e s r a t h e r than formal e d u c a t i o n a l ones (11) 13 E d u c a t i o n (77) 14  Children  should  learn  create  best  people  i n an  who  are  atmosphere  happy  where  and  the  well-adjusted  structure i s in  the are  b a c k g r o u n d a n d c h i l d r e n c a n make s o m e c h o i c e s a b o u t g o i n g t o d o a n d how t h e y a r e g o i n g t o d o i t . ( 1 4 )  15.  Education  16.  A good  17  should  teacher  Education  create people  loves children  should  teach  who  will  improve  what  society  they  (78)  (28)  children  to recognize  their  feelings  (50) 18. C h i l d r e n n a t u r a l l y l o v e t o l e a r n a n d w i l l t h e i r own i f t h e y a r e p e r m i t t e d ( 1 8 )  do s o e n t i r e l y  on  19. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d f o c u s o n a v a r i e t y o f s k i l l s - v o c a t i o n a l , academic, l e i s u r e a c t i v i t i e s and l i f e s t y l e i s s u e s (sex e d u c a t i o n , drug and a l c o h o l abuse e d u c a t i o n ) . (49) 20. E d u c a t i o n c a n enhance c r e a t i v i t y by p r o v i d i n g c h i l d r e n o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o do c r e a t i v e a c t i v i t i e s . 21. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d l e t c h i l d r e n n a t u r a l l y rather than f o r c e them difficult. (44) 22. A l l c h i l d r e n that they should  with  d i s c o v e r what t h e y a r e g o o d a t t o d o what t h e y d i s l i k e o r f i n d  need t o l e a r n c e r t a i n b a s i c s u b j e c t s but a f t e r f o l l o w t h e i r own i n t e r e s t s a n d t a l e n t s . ( 4 1 )  2 3 . No m a t t e r how h a r d y o u t r y , y o u c a n n o t t e a c h £\ c h i l d something i f t h e c h i l d does not f i n d i t i n t e r e s t i n g , e n j o y a b l e o r r e l e v a n t i n some m a n n e r . ( 4 5 ) 24. E d u c a t i o n (48)  should  teach  children  t o get along  25. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d s o c i e t y . (65)  teach  children  to question  with  others.  the values of  26. T h e c u r r i c u l u m must b e f l e x i b l e t o a l l o w t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n new t o p i c s a n d s u b j e c t s f r o m time' t o t i m e a s w e l l a s new i n f o r m a t i o n about s c i e n c e and h i s t o r y . (38 )  of  27. C h i l d r e n learn best i n a mainly c o o p e r a t i v e environment c o m p e t i t i o n r e s t r i c t e d t o c o m p e t i t i o n between groups or with o n e ' s own p a s t p e r f o r m a n c e . ( 6 )  with  28 A g o o d way f o r c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i s t h r o u g h formal e d u c a t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e s . (12) 29. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d t e a c h c h i l d r e n themselves as they a r e .(51)  t o be happy  play  rather  and  accept  than  267 3 0 . What wants t o  should learn.  be t a u g h t (35)  should  be  decided  by  what  the  child  31 E d u c a t i o n c a n e n h a n c e c r e a t i v i t y b y h e l p i n g c h i l d r e n t h e d i s c i p l i n e and s e l f - c o n t r o l t h a t i s n e c e s s a r y t o be c r e a t i ve. 3 2 . T h e b e s t way s i t u a t i o n from a  for c h i l d r e n to learn p a r e n t or t u t o r .  i s in a  33. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d e n c o u r a g e c h i l d r e n t o s t a n d a r d s o f n e a t n e s s and o r g a n i s a t i o n .  set  one-to-one  their  34. T e s t s s h o u l d b e u s e d o n l y a s ' s e l f - t e s t s ' t o w h e t h e r he h a s m a s t e r e d t h e t o p i c . <!£»8> 35. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d c r e a t e g o o d c i t i z e n s (76) 36. A learn 37.  good t e a c h e r (30)  The  best  way  lets  for  the  child  children  to  select  learn  what  is  from  develop truly  the  own  inform  child  other  the  child  wants  to  children  (2)  3 8 . An i m p o r t a n t p u r p o s e o f e d u c a t i o n i s t o ' e d u c a t e ' students a g e n e r a l s e n s e not t o p r e p a r e them f o r a c a r e e r . (70)  in  39. The current  is  c u r r i c u l u m must i n our society.  be  c o n s t a n t l y changing  to  reflect  40 . E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d n o t i n f l i c t a r b i t r a r y s t a n d a r d s c h i l d - t h e c h i l d s h o u l d d e c i d e how important a task amount o f t i m e and e f f o r t he o r s h e w i s h e s t o e x p e n d 41. E d u c a t i o n (74) 42. are  should  Most c h i l d r e n a r e s i x and s h o u l d be  43. T o b e teaching  a good (29)  44.  Education  45.  A  good  create  teacher  who  have  high  upon t h e i s and the on i t . ( 5 7 )  moral  standards  r e a d y t o b e g i n f o r m a l eck.icati.on b e f o r e a l l o w e d t o do s o (19)  teacher,  should  people  what  one  create  i s an  must  people  example- o f  have  who  a  are  moral  natural  gift  employable  for  (75)  behaviour.  46. What s h o u l d b e t a u g h t s h o u l d b e d e c i d e d b y t h e person r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t e a c h i n g t h e c h i l d •- h i s t e a c h e r , t u t o r o r parents. (36) 4 7 . T h e r e a r e s o m e s u b j e c t s a c h i l d may find difficult, u n i n t e r e s t i n g or i r r e l e v a n t . HOwever, he or s h e s t i l l has l e a r n t h e m i n o r d e r t o become an e d u c a t e d person.(43)  to  they  48 .A c a r e e r o r j o b from w o r k i n g i n t h e e d u c a t i on. i l 2 )  i s the best education. r e a l w o r l d t h a n t h e y do  4 9 . An e m p h a s i s on n e a t n e s s a n d l e a r n i n g and c r e a t i v i t y . (63)  Students learn from formal  organisation stifles  50. Education should encourage c h i l d r e n n e a t n e s s and o r g a n i s a t i o n . (61)  to  51. and  i s wrong  Education g i v e them  should teach chiIdren'what t h e t o o l s t o f i x i t . (66)  52. C h i l d r e n l e a r n e x t e r n a l l y imposed  b e s t i n an a t m o s p h e r e s t r u c t u r e s , r u l e s and  53. To be a g o o d t e a c h e r , one educated i n many a r e a s . (23)  must  54.  Tests  a  55. and  A g o o d way for c h i l d r e n expIanations. (10)  seldom  measure  56. C h i l d r e n l e a r n defined structure, 57. the  best with  what to  i n an clear  be  with  of  society  of freedom, f r e e of expectations. CIS)  knows. is  true  standards  intelIigent  child learn  meet  more  from  and  welI  (69) adult  demonstrations  atmosphere where t h e r e i s a c l e a r l y r u l e s and e x p e c t a t i o n s . (13)  E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d f o c u s on a c a d e m i c s c i e n c e s , language's and t h e l i k e .  s u b j e c t s : the? (47)  humanities,  SES. A g o o d way f o r c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i s by r e a d i n g r a t h e r t h a n h a v i n g t o a s k s o m e o n e* f o r i n f o r mat i on o r t r y i n g t o d i s c o v e r i t themselves. (7) 5 9 . What s h o u l d d e v e l o p m e n t and  be t a u g h t s h o u l d education. (33)  be  decided  by  experts  in  by  child  6 0 . E d u c a t i o n c a n enhance* a c h i l d ' s s e l f - e s t e e m b y s e t t i n g h i g h s t a n d a r d s f o r a c a d e m i c a c c o m p l i s h m e n t and b e h a v i o u r and e n c o u r a g i n g c h i l d r e n t o meet t h e m t h r o u g h h a r d w o r k a n d s e l f ™ discipIine. (79) 61. A child  gooci t e a c h e r p l a n s I e a r n i n g . (24)  62. T o b e a g o o d t e a c h e r , teaching methods.(26)  l e s s o n s and  one  must  directs  have  the  course  specialised  of  the  training  in  63. M o s t c h i l d r e n a r e n o t r e a d y t o b e g i n e d u c a t i o n u n t i l welI a f t e r age* s i x a n d s h o u l d n o t be* p u s h e d i n f o r m a l e d u c a t i o n u n t i l they are ready (21)  269  THE BOTTOM  20s  LEAST  LIKE  MY  BELIEFS  64. C h i l d r e n l o v e t o l e a r n w h a t i s e a s y a n d p l e a s a n t b u t u n f o r t u n a t e l y sometimes have t o be forced t o study those w h i c h a r e most d i f f i c u l t o r l e s s p l e a s a n t .  areas  65. The t r a d i t i o n a l age o f s i x i s a good age t o s t a r t formal e d u c a t i o n b e c a u s e i t i s t h e a g e most c h i l d r e n a r e r e a d y f o r i t . (20) 66.  There  i s nothing  a l l children  need  to learn.  (42)  67. T h e i m p o r t a n t purpose of education i s t o prepare a career r a t h e r than p r o v i d e a ' g e n e r a l ' education.  students for  68. (4)  competition.  Children  learn  best  i n an a t m o s p h e r e  of friendly  69. A l t h o u g h t h e c u r r i c u l u m h a s t o be a d j u s t e d t o i n c l u d e s c i e n t i f i c d i s c o v e r i e s and r e c e n t h i s t o r i c a l events, the t o p i c s c o v e r e d and t h e s u b j e c t s i n c l u d e d can remain b a s i c a l l y unchanged from g e n e r a t i o n t o g e n e r a t i o n . (37) 7 0 What s h o u l d b e t a u g h t s h o u l d b e d e c i d e d b y t h e e c o n o m i c o f t h e r e l i g i o u s and/or e t h n i c i n t e r e s t s o f t h e community. 7:1..  Education  72. T h e b e s t with a group  should  focus  on t h e ' 3 ~ R ' s ' ( 4 6 )  way f o r c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i s f r o m o f c h i l d r e n t h e same a g e . (1)  7 3 . T e s t s may b e u n p o p u l a r but t h e y a r e a good well a c h i l d ' s e d u c a t i o n i s p r o g r e s s i n g . (67) 74. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d a u t h o r i t y . (64) 75. has  teach  needs (34)  children  respect  What s h o u l d b e t a u g h t s h o u l d b e d e c i d e d t r a d i t i o n a l l y been t a u g h t . (32)  an a d u l t  way  leader  t o measure  for tradition  by r e f e r r i n g  how  and  t o what  76. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d e n c o u r a g e c h i l d r e n t o s t r i v e f o r e x c e l l e n c e and t h e a c h i e v e m e n t o f g o a l s s e t b y t e a c h e r s / t u t o r s , p a r e n t s , o r other a u t h o r i t a t i v e bodies ( u n i v e r s i t i e s , award-granting groups) (55) 77. A g o o d memorizing  way f o r c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i s b y d r i l l i n g a n d information u n t i l they can r e c a l l i t instantly.  (8)  7E). G o a l s s u c h a s ' c r e a t i n g l i f e t i m e l e a r n e r s ' c a n b e s t b e accomplished by e x p o s i n g c h i l d r e n t o a r i g o r o u s academic c u r r i c u l u m w h i c h g i v e s them t h e knowledge and i n f o r m a t i o n t o  270 pursue 79. and  further  education  i f a n d when  they  want  t o . (.83)  Most c h i l d r e n would p r o b a b l y s p e n d a l l o f t h e i r t i m e p l a y i n g l e a r n l i t t l e i f t h e y w e r e l e f t t o t h e i r own d e v i c e s . ( 1 6 )  80. A l l c h i l d r e n their education.  should (40)  be taught  t h e same  subjects  throughout  81. The- g o a l o f ' c r e a t i n g l i f e t i m e ? l e a r n e r s ' w h i l e p e r h a p s admirable, i s not a p r a c t i c a l one f o r e d u c a t i o n and d e t r a c t s more a t t a i n a b l e g o a l s . ( 8 2 )  from  82. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d e n c o u r a g e t h e viilue»s o f t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r (59)  c h i l d r e n t o a c c e p t and conform t o r e l i g i o u s or e t h n i c community.  83. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d e n c o u r a g e J u d e o - C h r i s t i a n v a l u e s . (58)  children  t o conform  8 4 . What s h o u l d b e t a u g h t s h o u l d be? d e c i d e d B i b l e and B i b l i c a l s t a n d a r d s . (31)  to  traditional  by r e f e r e n c e t o t h e  FACTOR ARRAY FOR MOST L I K E MY B E L I E F S 1. ' E d u c a t i o n t r u t h . (73)  should  FACTOR  create  II  people  who  love  2. T h e b e s t way f o r c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n s i t u a t i o n from a p a r e n t or t u t o r (3) 3. A g o o d way f o r c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n I i f e ' e x p e r i e n c e s r a t h e r than formal  knowledge  i s in a  a n d seek,  one-to-one  i s from ' r e a l educational ones.  (11)  4. C r e a t i n g l i f e t i m e l e a r n e r s i s a n i m p o r t a n t function of e d u c a t i o n which c a n be a c c o m p l i s h e d b e s t by encouraging c h i l d r e n ' s c r e a t i v i t y and n a t u r a l l o v e o f l e a r n i n g . (84) 5. C h i l d r e n I e a r n b e s t i n a n a t m o s p h e r e - w h e r e t h e s t r u c t u r e i s i n t h e b a c k g r o u n d a n d c h i l d r e n c a n make s o m e c h o i c e s a b o u t what t h e y a r e g o i n g t o d o a n d how t h e y a r e g o i n g t o d o i t . ( 1 4 ) 6. A g o o d way f o r c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i s t o d i s c o v e r k n o w l e d g e f o r t h e m s e l v e s r a t h e r than s i m p l y r e a d or hear about i t . (9) 7. A g o o d  teacher  loves  8.  teacher  loves  A good  children  l e a r n i n g (25)  9. E:".d ne a t i o n s h o u I d c r e a t e 10.  A good  teacher  11. E d u c a t i o n (74)  g ood  i s an e x a m p l e  should  (28)  create  c i t i :•: e n s ( 7 6 ) o f moral  people  who  behaviour  have  high  (22)  moral,  standards  12. C h i l d r e n l e a r n b e s t i n a m a i n l y c o o p e r a t i v e e n v i r o n m e n t with c o m p e t i t i o n r e s t r i c t e d t o c o m p e t i t i o n between groups o f with o n e ' s own p a s t p e r f o r m a n c e ( 6 ) 13. T h e c u r r i c u l u m must b e f l e x i b l e t o a l l o w t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f new t o p i c s a n d s u b j e c t s f r o m t i m e t o t i m e a s w e l I a s new i n f o r m a t i o n about s c i e n c e and h i s t o r y . (38) 14. What s h o u l d b e t a u g h t s h o u l d b e d e c i d e d B i b l e or B i b l i c a l s t a n d a r d s (31) 15. E d u c a t i o n c a n e n h a n c e c r e a t i v i t y the d i s c i p l i n e and s e l f - c o n t r o l t h a t c r e a t i v e . (52)  by r e f e r e n c e  to the  by h e l p i n g c h i l d r e n develop i s n e c e s s a r y t o be t r u l y  16. A l l c h i l d r e n n e e d t o I e a r n c e r t a i n b a s i c s u b j e c t s ? b u t a f t e r t h a t ? t h e y s h o u l d f o l l o w t h e i r own i n t e r e s t s a n d t a l e n t s ( 4 1 )  17. A l l c h i l d r e n a r e n a t u r a l l y c r e a t i v e ? a n d t h e r o l e o f e d u c a t i o n i s t o make s u r e t h i s n a t u r a l c r e a t i v i t y i s n o t d e s t r o y e d by r e s t r i c t i v e p r a c t i c e s . (54) IB. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d author i ty.C64) 19. E d u c a t i o n opportunities  teach  children  21. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d e n c o u r a g e J u d e o - C h r i s t i an v a I u e s (58) Education  for  tradition  c a n e n h a n c e c r e a t i v i t y by p r o v i d i n g t o do c r e a t i v e a c t i v i t i e s . (53)  20. Most c h i l d r e n a r e n o t r e a d y a f t e r age s i x and s h o u l d n o t be u n t i l they are ready. (.21)  22.  respect  should  focus  on  the  to  to  27.  Ed uc a t i o n  plans (24)  ' 3 - R ' s ' (.46.)  shouId  2 8 . T h e b e s t way for i s by r e s p e c t i n g h i s  atmosphere  lessons  c r eat e  with  traditional  to  inform  the  24. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d e n c o u r a g e c h i l d r e n t o s e t t h e i r own and s t a n d a r d s a n d t r y t o m e e t t h e m w i t h o u t c o m p a r i s o n t o students. (56)  26. A g o o d t e a c h e r child's learning.  and  until well education  conform  23. T e s t s s h o u l d be u s e d o n l y a s " s e l f - t e s t s ' whether he has m a s t e r e d t h e t o p i c . (68)  25. C h i l d r e n l e a r n b e s t i n a n or g r oup c ompet i t i o n . (4)  good  children  to begin education pushed i n t o formal  children  a  and  p eopIe  of  friendly  directs  wh o  will  the  goals other  individual  course  i mp r o v e  child  of  the  soc i et y  (78)  education to enhance a c h i l d ' s s e l f - e s t e e m f e e l i n g s and a c c e p t i n g h i m a s he i s . (80)  29. C h i l d r e n l e a r n b e s t comp e t i t i on i s a v o i d e d . 30. E d u c a t i o n e n h a n c e s a g u i d e s h i s own education interests.(81)  i n an (5)  atmosphere  of  cooperation  child's self-esteem a n d f o l l o w s h i s own  31. A career of job i s the best education. from w o r k i n g i n t h e r e a l w o r l d t h a n t h e y do education. (72) 32. A g o o d t e a c h e r d o e s n ' t a c t u a l l y t e a c h ? c a t a I y s t an d a r e s o u r c e p e r s o n . (27)  where  when t h e c h i l d n e e d s and  Students learn from formal  she/he  acts  as  a  more  273 33. C h i l d r e n l e a r n defines structure?  best with  i n an clear  atmosphere* where t h e r e i s a r u l e s and expeetations.(13)  clearly  3 4 . T h e r e a r e s o m e s u b j e c t s a c h i l d may find difficult? u n i n t e r e s t i n g or i r r e l e v a n t . H o w e v e r ? he o r s h e s t i l l has l e a r n them i n o r d e r t o become an e d u c a t e d person. (43) 3 5 . A g o o d way for formal e d u c a t i o n a l  c h i l d r e n t o learn i s through experiences. (12)  play  to  rather  than  36. A l t h o u g h t h e c u r r i c u l u m h a s t o b e a d j u s t t o i n c l u d e s c i e n t i f i c d i s c o v e r i e s and r e c e n t h i s t o r i c a l events? the t o p i c s c o v e r e d and t h e s u b j e c t s c a n r e m a i n b a s i c a l l y u n c h a n g e d f r o m generation to generation. (37) 3 7 . C h i l d r e n l o v e t o l e a r n w h a t i s e a s y a n d p l e a s a n t f o r them? b u t u n f o r t u n a t e l y ? s o m e t i m e s h a v e t o b e f o r c e d t o s t u d y those* a r e a s w h i c h a r e most d i f f i c u l t or l e s s p I e a s a n t . (17) 33. how  T e s t s may b e u n p o p u l a r ? b u t the*y are* a g o o d way well a c h i l d ' s education i s p r o g r e s s i n g . (67)  39. the  Education sciences?  should maths?  f o c u s on a c a d e m i c s u b j e c t s : the* l a n g u a g e s ? and t h e l i k e . (47)  humanities?  40. E d u c a t i o n (48)  should  teach  others  children  to  get  along  to  with  measure  41. E d u c a t i o n s h o u l d l e t c h i l d r e n d i s c o v e r what n a t u r a l l y g o o d a t ? r a t h e r t h a n f o r c e them t o do or f i n d d i f f i c u l t . (44)  they