"The Economist" on Homeschooling

The Economist recently published an article on homeschooling. It was exciting to see homeschooling get some publicity at this level, as the article was mostly positive. It focused on a homeschooling family where "every chance to learn something new is eagerly seized." It described the growth of homeschooling and a brief history of it.

I was surprised, however, to see such a narrow view of homeschooling depicted. The piece seemed focused on the premise that the Presidency of Barack Obama may lead more families to homeschool because they would want to avoid the influences the Obama administration may have on education. The homeschools the author chooses to describe in depth in the article are clearly not a representative sample of homeschoolers in America. It seems that although mentioned, reasons for homeschooling beyond religion or "shielding... children from what they see as bad influences" are really just glossed over. The final sentence of the article states "And Mr Obama is far too liberal for most of America’s home-schoolers." I must say, not only do I personally not feel that way, but I happen to know many other homeschoolers who do not feel that way.

The author seized an opportunity to use a portion of the homeschooling community to prove a point, but I think really missed other important components of homeschooling. I think it is just not as simple as the author would have the reader believe.

Additionally, I suppose, given the author's premise, if the Obama administration does make substantial changes to the American education system, then some homeschoolers may return to the public or private schools. If there were changes to to NCLB, a decreased focus on standardized testing, an increased focus on the arts, smaller class sizes, would some homeschoolers return to school?