MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2271652812

THE PRIMA FACIE CASE AGAINST HOMESCHOOLING

2011· article· en· W2271652812 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Randall Curren, J.C. Blokhuis

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Affairs Quarterly · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Education Studies and Reforms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSafeguardingPolitical scienceAttendanceLawDoctrineEnforcementMedicineNursing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Until recently, it was widely assumed in societies with long-established, pub licly funded school systems that school attendance served the interests of children, society, and parents alike. In the United States and other common-law jurisdictions, safeguarding and promoting the independent welfare and devel opmental interests of every child was a public responsibility under the parens patriae doctrine. Compulsory schooling laws enacted under parens patriae authority required all persons having care and control of a child to share their custodial authority with publicly certified teachers for limited periods of time.1 By compelling all parents to send their children to school, the state ensured that all children had access to instruction and opportunities for social, economic, and civic participation beyond what their parents alone could provide. Parents were incidentally freer to manage the competing demands of domestic life and paid employment, and the enforcement of child labor laws was greatly facilitated by efforts to ensure school attendance.2 While compulsory schooling laws imposed obvious limits on the custodial authority of all parents for the sake of all children, they were rarely challenged on that basis. Not so today. Growing numbers of parents in the United States, Canada, the United King dom, and elsewhere are now attempting to educate their children at home, many of them claiming an exclusive and unconditional right to determine what their children will and will not learn.3 These parents are quite diverse and have a va riety of reasons for homeschooling and unschooling, though the movement is dominated by conservative Christian parents and the Christian fundamentalist Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA).4 Much of what is written about homeschooling emanates from or relies on the claims of the HSLDA and its affiliates.5 A slender stream of scholarship not endorsed or underwritten by the HSLDA and the National Home Education Research Institute (NHERI) has begun to flow, but little of it has taken a wide view of the aims and advantages of common schools and the limitations of what parents can provide children outside of common schools. The general case for compulsory school attendance has not been revisited and evaluated, despite occasional references to civic education

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.016
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0120.020
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublic Affairs QuarterlySame topicDiverse Education Studies and ReformsFrench-language works237,207