Tried and tested
The Gist of Traditional School at Home: Replicate at home what institutional school looks like at its best.
Part of my How Homeschool? Series.
At its purest, the traditional school at home model is the most familiar. You may want the key benefits of homeschooling like 1:1 individualized attention and pacing, incentivized teaching, flexibility, safety, providing a sound sleep schedule and diet - but don’t want to reinvent the wheel. If you plan to only homeschool for so long (I have friends who transitioned to institutions in high school ahead of college applications), this model maps on neatly. Even if you homeschool all the way through, this approach may allow for easier integration into society that went through something similar. And it’s worth observing that those who thrive in traditional schools form the supermajority at elite institutions of higher education. There’s quite a bit of dead space in the typical institutional school day and homeschoolers regularly report getting through the standard state curriculum in a fraction of the time - simultaneously, you enjoy the confidence of seeing test results and knowing “what to expect” benchmarks at whatever age.
Figure 1. How Traditional school-at-home practitioners view all other approaches.
But the problems of traditional school are not limited to its industrial setting. Because every child must succeed, the government drops standards and gives you a false sense of accomplishment if you follow their guidance (today, “graduating from university is more common than completing high school in the 1940s,” before social promotion really took off, and the typical college student’s intelligence has been dropping, to the point that it is now “merely average”). The education establishment very often trips over itself in enthusiastic pursuit of some novel theory that doesn’t work - and that very often poorly informs state curricula (and influences private schools, too). The substance of the humanities may not align at all with your values - and may even reject them altogether. And traditional school rejects student-led learning or specialization in favor of a broad curriculum dictated by bureaucrats. Indeed, every other approach to homeschooling says that this doesn’t go far enough in its differences.
Figure 2. In the future, high schools will have diploma vending machines. Press your age, feed in a test score, and if you're in the top 50%, you get to be summa cum laude!
One solution is to start with your state curriculum and then start editing (go from base model to based model) but you may find that your end-product is so dramatically different that you ought to consider alternative approaches. Another solution is to build your curriculum not off the state but off the very best traditional school, perhaps your favorite present private institution or even public school of yesteryear - though getting the specifics of what to do when can be difficult. A third solution is to review the various all-in-one commercial homeschool programs and pick out what seems to best align with what you’re shooting for (though some of course will draw more from one of the other approaches I discuss later, others really are a cleaned up version of standard school, perhaps with a Christian flavor - or what, reputationally, Catholic schools aspire to: high academic standards and aligned values. Notably, secular outsiders criticize some of the homeschooling Christian curricula for lack of academic rigor.)
If you were to preserve the essence of school at home but steelman it for highest academic potential, you would have to dive into the wars on education research and follow the evidence. The good news is that, already by homeschooling, 1:1 attention has fantastic results that public educators have understandably struggled with figuring out how to scale. Then ignore whatever your state practices (while still following the law). You’d want to teach phonics (sounding out words) so your kids could best learn how to read. E.D. Hirsch argues that reading comprehension consists of vocabulary plus world knowledge - and therefore your children must accumulate lots of specific facts to inherit cultural literacy. A proven way of teaching such facts is through direct instruction, which teachers hate because its steps are so scripted - but that feature may actually make it easier for inexperienced homeschoolers to teach. The best way to memorize anything is through space repetition, which can now be more easily applied than ever before with computerized algorithms. And, to call back to the days when school actually held back or skipped grades, children should not advance simply based on their age but instead based on their mastery of subjects, which is measured through regular tests in which they must consistently get over 90% of answers correct before moving on; whatever their score, they need consistent, constructive feedback. A principal objective beyond straight academics would be to teach self-control, which is an even better predictor of academic success than IQ. This is a sampling of where I understand traditional educational research to be at - and I’d bet that, on average, following this regime would result in pretty darn good test scores!
Figure 3. An algorithmically-trained culturally literate child breezing through a standardized test. Assuming those are still a thing by the time your child applies to college.
Of course, not everyone wants to steelman school-at-home for academic excellence. You very well could be satisfied with quickly getting through the recommended content of a typical school day and then doing whatever is important to your family, perhaps inspired by some of the other approaches I describe elsewhere. But it does feel like the “goal” of Traditional is to get into the best college - and if that’s what you want, you should look at the evidence. I find other potential goals to be far less plausible given how useless most of the subjects are and how soon graduates forget what they learn, but that’s the pragmatist in me coming out.
A typical day could be recognizably similar to a school day: a parent would instruct children on each subject, assign work to be done, review and provide feedback; the subjects would be interspersed with breaks; and then at some point the afternoon would be devoted to extracurricular activities. My understanding is that, especially amidst the surge in homeschooling during covid, this has been the most popular approach, though one homeschooling mom assures me that almost nobody who sticks with homeschooling for six months simply carbon copies the local institutional school. The homeschooling historian Milton Gaither confirms on a longer timeline:
“Several in-depth qualitative studies of homeschooling families have revealed interesting details about home-school life. A steady stream of research over the past two decades has found a consistent pattern of pedagogical development. When they first begin homeschooling, nervous mothers often rely on a prefabricated curriculum, seeking to replicate the conventional school experience at home. By the second or third year they have become more flexible ("eclectic" is a popular self-designation) and tend to engage their children in more outside activities. If the family continues homeschooling over the long haul, parents often become more like facilitators, and children largely take control of their own learning.”
But how might other homeschooling approaches critique and comment on traditional school-at-home? (Note that this is imaginative speculation, not quotation unless specified, from each point of view)
Classical: the Traditional school curriculum is insufficiently rigorous and is too attentive to modern political correctness at the expense of the greatest minds of all time. While the evidence-based version does encourage fact accumulation, it does not build on that developmentally into formal logic and the effective communication of ideas. Worse, its emphasis on direct instruction neglects the most powerful learning technique developed: the Socratic method. Traditional school, even at its best when it tries to pursue (and test) ‘executive function’ in its own sterile language, misses a soul that cultivates the accumulated wisdom of civilization. Think with Aristotle, not the latest drivel from some education school PhD
Charlotte Mason: Traditional school neglects the most important instruction of all: character. Raising a child to choose rightly in life is more important than training a child to choose the maximum number of right multiple choice bubbles on a standardized test. The Traditional approach compels you to read textbooks written by committees that no one would otherwise read, deadening learning. A central thesis of education should be that if you can cultivate a child’s love of reading good books, that will take him to everywhere he needs to go. The evidence-based version treats children as robots rather than human beings; children learn best through the gentle assimilation of knowledge via rich literature and meaningful stories. Traditional school also improperly keeps children cooped up inside when they should instead be seeking renewal in nature. Ultimately, Traditional just thinks of avoiding red marks and Charlotte Mason thinks of avoiding a Scarlet Letter.
PhD Dad Art Robinson: Traditional schools, caught up in academic fads, fail at everything rather than excelling at the basics of numeracy and literacy and their curriculum has been morally compromised. Traditional school standards have dropped every generation since they became mandatory and are a terrible guide for what should be expected, much less what’s possible. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that “education” majors who go on to determine and teach the curriculum have, on average, near the lowest IQ of any college major. The reigning model of mediocrity fails to understand that children learn best when they teach themselves; the responsibility of the adult is to curate the right curriculum and proctor. Further, an adult trying to teach all the subjects which would normally be split among multiple teachers is more likely to burn out. Finally, kids operating on the Traditional model have way too much weekend learning loss; the Lord rested on just the 7th day, not also the 6th.
PhD Dad Bryan Caplan: even well-regarded Traditional schools require unnecessary frills that bore students at all ends of the intellectual spectrum and don’t actually prepare them for the future. Homeschool allows you to play society’s game signaling as much as you have to, require the basics that enable professional success for your particular children, and otherwise let your kids enjoy themselves free of stupid requirements. But maybe one not-so-stupid requirement is economics.
Figure 4. Caplan’s twins were homeschooled for middle school and then their mother insisted they return to a (prestigious) institution for high school, which was immediately and obviously a worse, anti-intellectual experience that involved a depressingly large number of (mandatory) arts and crafts. One twin said to the other “Do you want to be a poster monkey for the rest of your life?” and the pair convinced their parents to continue homeschooling through high school. They both got full merit scholarships to Vanderbilt. Think hard about what you want to import from Traditional school and what exactly it accomplishes!
Mentors: instead of your teaching all Traditional subjects with equal emphasis, you should identify the absolutely most talented tutors available and lean into their expertise. In an ideal world, you would find people who matched your child’s interests/talents, possibly who would be willing to use the best evidenced techniques, or possibly leaning into a less-testing centric model typical of the childhoods of genius. Simultaneously, you must go beyond the standard structured curriculum and curate very competent adults who are not professional teachers to spend extensive formal and informal time with your children - because the smartest people in society are often rewarded professionally to do things that involve zero interactions with children and, separately, it’s not only what you know, but whom you know. And, very often, going to participate in adult activities may be better than whatever formal learning was planned that day.
Cyberschoolers: Of course, all the Traditional subjects can be taught online and indeed you probably won’t be able to teach any particular subject as well as the best person online. But institutional school as we know it was designed well over a century ago by people who could not even fathom the instant, vast resources that would become available through the internet (nor much of the modern economy). We need to restart from scratch and ask, from first principles, what do we want education to be like for each child - and then how can we best deliver that outcome? Answers will be different than what you could come up with in the 1800s. Why use a compass when you have GPS?
Montessori: Traditional school starts way too late, improperly has the teacher direct the choice of activities rather than the child, and generally does not appreciate the dignity, capability, or hands-on sensorial learning potential of children. Traditional schools overvalue lecture at the expense of a prepared environment filled with captivating teaching materials. And Traditional schools are frenetic, moving from activity to activity, rather than cultivating a child’s attention span. The “evidence-based” version is too bound by Traditional school’s confines, especially neglecting the evidence for children’s need for autonomy. Traditional school is like reading a book of recipes; Montessori puts you in the kitchen.
Pragmatists: Traditional school starts way too early and generally overemphasizes academics at the expense of practical life skills and virtues. Most people won’t use most of what they learn in school but everyone should know how to cook a healthy meal, manage their budget, and marry the right person - none of which is normally taught.
Unschoolers: Traditional school wastes an immense amount of time, first on things that can be learned fairly quickly then on things that practically no one uses; worse, Traditional school destroys love of learning, intrinsic motivation, and creativity by dictating a one-size-fits-all curriculum to be obeyed rather than following each child’s intellectual interest and curiosity wherever it goes. It is way too confined to a classroom when the whole world is available. Over-scheduled, overwhelmed, and over-protected, Traditional kids can become anxious, angry, or resigned. Education should be more like a library, offering to help deepen interests, than a mandatory training session everyone hates. And besides, not every child should go to college. Traditional education gives every child the same sized shoe and calls that efficient.
Specialists: Traditional school has gigantic opportunity costs and is necessarily designed for the average child. At its best, Traditional school is good for trivia night. Instead, you should figure out what your child can be the best in the world at, try to cut or at least deemphasize everything else, and ruthlessly focus. Mozart wasn’t composing symphonies and filling out problem sets. Some of the evidence-based approach could be helpful so long as it’s narrowly confined.
Figure 5. While explaining that this is the true aspiration may actually motivate more students in Traditional school, it’s fair to say that this is also a low bar.
Pioneers: Traditional school is too feminized and fails to account for meaningful sex differences, thereby failing young men. Homeschooling sons needs to lean into what’s best for boys: prioritizing math and science; history that celebrates great men doing great deeds, not going over the daily life of victims; science fiction and non-fiction over 19th century romantic literature; embracing frequent outside physical activity, movement, and hands-on-learning (including the delay of formal academics). It is vital to find male teachers (even if it’s dad, uncles, grandfathers) and to create opportunities for competition. And of course much more blowing things up.
Bible first: The fundamental question for children is not whether they are prepared for life but whether they are prepared for the afterlife - whether they are saved. The right knowledge is more important than comprehensive knowledge and the teaching of theology (absent from traditional curricula) must come first (not just be an afterthought) and be thorough. The world is less important than the Word. Education then should involve exploring how each student can glorify God through the moral pursuit of her given vocation. “Traditional” curriculum is hopelessly secular and cannot be saved merely by adding prayers here and there.
Unit studies: Traditional school compartmentalizes learning into subject-specific silos, which can limit the understanding of how knowledge is interrelated and applicable to real-world situations. All subjects are everything everywhere all at once! One variant would also argue that traditional school fails to cultivate entrepreneurialism.
Have I missed an important critique of Traditional school at home? Let me know.
My own takeaway: Traditional school is what all alternatives are responding to and so it’s necessary to understand both how it works usually and at its best. Because it also is the most common form of education, it is also the most rigorously studied; though it’s not always simple or easy to navigate academic gobbledygook and ideological motivations, there do seem to be things that actually work and are worth an especially hard look to see if they fit within whatever homeschooling regime you choose. My family does find much of the criticism compelling, so our journey won’t start and end with mimicking Traditional school at home. I’d also love to see more public choice economics on how Traditional schools have made certain decisions about what and how to teach (looking at the incentives of the teachers, bureaucrats, etc). But a school-at-home program that relies on scripted direct instruction to teach phonics, then E.D. Hirsch's cultural literacy and has children retain it via space repetition managed through an algorithm all in pursuit of mastery as defined by Benjamin Bloom, with frequent formative assessments to gage where children are in their understanding is about the best you can do if you basically like Traditional school.
Further reading would include:
Make It Stick: the Science of Successful Learning
Admittedly, I read this almost a decade ago but I plan to re-read it and I think it fits the bill for trying to lean in to what the evidence says works in education. I do recall its mentioning that you lose about 70% of what you read pretty quickly and the last 30% falls off more slowly and so they have specific strategies for retrieval. Apparently that statistic is part of the 30% for me from that book!
Although I have not read him directly, Benjamin Bloom is a top resource for figuring out what actually works. The famous Bloom 2 sigma problem refers to the scalability problem in finding that 1:1 tutoring allows the median child to outperform 98% of his peers in a control group -- but that’s a Bloom 2 sigma opportunity for homeschoolers.
Teach Your Children Well was a bestseller among homeschoolers in the late 1990s that revealed how traditional schools had abandoned (or never pursued) some of the proven best practices (for reasons often not about kids - teachers didn’t like the step-by-step rote formality of direct instruction, even though it works)
E.D. Hirsch on Why Knowledge Matters.
Though Hirsch himself is not conservative, he has been celebrated by conservatives since the 1980s for fact-centered learning. Simultaneously, Hirsch has been attacked by liberals for sustaining Western cultural biases. While this book makes the general case, he also has several books about what kids at different ages should know and a general dictionary of cultural literacy. Personally, I get the argument but also find our culture to be corrosive and full literacy with it to be questionable; more recent additions of Hirsch’s work have also started to respond to liberal criticism by including things via affirmative action that no one recognizes, undermining the purpose of the program.
The Educated Child, from Bill Bennett, Ronald Reagan’s Secretary of Education, very much influenced by Hirsch, this is a good conventional take on what to expect from a child’s education through the 8th grade. I should also note that while I’ve used the term “traditional school at home” to mean importing institutional school into the home, there’s also a debate within institutional schools about how “traditional” (teacher-directed, test-oriented, rote-learning drills) versus “progressive” (student-directed, looser standards, hands-on activities) teaching ought to be (with Bennett clearly on the traditional side). When I say “institutional school at its best,” I am making some assumptions about “Traditional” education in contrast with modern “Progressive” education (though the student-direction can be attractive): simply importing exactly what the typical child does at the typical school today could be disastrously non-educational.
This is a collection of right-leaning American critiques of Traditional school that can also inform how you would change a school-at-home program but quite a few of their critiques disappear in a homeschool environment (e.g. they criticize personalized education as chaotic in a classroom of tens of kids). But your homeschool probably aspires to give your kids "an understanding of and appreciation for why America exists and what it stands for, to transmit history and civics and a positive attitude toward America's strengths as well as a reasoned commitment to addressing its weaknesses." It does note that not all education should prepare for college: "It would be a surprising coincidence if preparation for college and preparation for life outside it were identical." And laments that the right has ceded to shaping of souls to the left, which now sees education's sole mission as the shaping of antiracists.
Thiagarajan was born in India to a South Indian father and American mother, got a Harvard education degree, and has taught at a variety of public and private schools in the United States, Singapore, and India. Her politics can be distracting (English is “the language of the colonizer, the language of power”) but the book is nevertheless a useful study in the contrasts of east and west Traditional schools, importantly underscoring that not all Traditional schools are the same (in particular, American schools are much for attentive to self-esteem than honest feedback; Asian schools tend to be more math-oriented early)
What else should someone read if they are trying to do traditional school at home?
Thanks for reading! If you enjoyed this, forward it to a friend: Know anyone who is thinking about homeschooling their kids? How about anyone with kids? Or do you know anybody who was once a kid?
If you liked this, be sure to check out my other newsletters, especially the others in this series, which started with this introduction that will be updated with links as they are released: How Homeschool?
If you’ve received this email from a friend and would like more, sign up at www.grantreadsbooks.com. I read over 100 non-fiction books a year (history, business, self-management) and share a review (and terrible cartoons) every couple weeks with my friends. Really, it’s all about how to be a better American and how America can be better. Look forward to having you on board!