Shawn F. Peters and James G. Dwyer, Homeschooling: The History and Philosophy of a Controversial Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
here join forces to pen a book that is one part historical description and one part normative argument.The first three chapters, written by Peters, provide the history.Chapter 1 describes the pervasive use of the home to educate children in early North America, as well as the gradual eclipse of that tendency as formal schools were established.Chapter 2 describes how after World War II many Americans grew distrustful of government entities, including public schools.Conservative Protestants, historically strong backers of public education, began turning away from the increasingly secular public schools to private religious schools and, eventually, to homeschooling.At the same time, radicals on the philosophical left grew critical of the bureaucracy of public education, advocating for private schools and, eventually, homeschooling.Peters attends to the legal history, showing that American courts have always maintained that state governments have the right to regulate independent educational ventures, though most states have chosen not to.Chapter 3 describes the growth and diversification of homeschooling and covers some of the controversies that have emerged as the movement has matured.The final three chapters, written by Dwyer, make the normative case for rigorous regulation of homeschooling in the name of children's rights.The state has always, claims Dwyer, regulated the family.Dwyer seeks to provide a theory of why and how this regulation should take place, providing six normative principles.First, children are persons, not property.Second, all persons possess rights to self-determination.Children, being persons, have this right as well.Children are not yet able to exercise this right, but that does not give parents or the state the right to control them.Parents and the state do have interests in the outcome of a child's education.Third, children have the greatest interest in their educations.Fourth, the State must determine what the child's interests are.The state should base its calculus on scientific consensus.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".