research report about home schooling

• 0 Shopping Cart $ 0.00 -->

Key Research Page

New Study: How Many Homeschool Students in 2021-2022?

National Home Education Research Institute — Homeschool Facts

Homeschooling – home education or home-based education – has grown from nearly extinct in the United States in the 1970s to over 3.0 million school-age students. NHERI focuses on homeschooling research, homeschool facts, homeschool fast facts, and in-depth scholarly articles.

NHERI can help you

If you are a:.

Doing a story on homeschooling? Contact mail @ nheri.org 503-364-1490; research facts .

We do basic research and publish it.

We can talk with you. We serve as a clearinghouse of research, facts, statistics, and news.

We keep you in touch with new research findings – get connected .

See resources on homeschooling below at “About Homeschooling.”

We offer a peer-reviewed research journal .

About NHERI

NHERI conducts homeschooling research, is a clearinghouse of research for the public, researchers, homeschoolers, the media, and policy makers, and educates the public concerning the findings of all related research. NHERI executes, evaluates, and disseminates studies and information (e.g., statistics, facts, data) on homeschooling (i.e., home schooling, home-based education, home education, home school, home-schooling, unschooling, deschooling, a form of alternative education), publishes reports and the peer-reviewed scholarly journal Home School Researcher, and serves in consulting, academic achievement tests, and expert witness (in courts and legislatures).

PO Box 13939 Salem, OR 97309 503-364-1490 503-364-3837 fax contact NHERI

• Academic Leadership Journal
• Bibliography of Research on Homeschooling
• Education Resources Information Center
• Home School Researcher journal
• NHERI on Research
• NHERI Research News
• Journal of School Choice review of research

About Homeschooling

• Classical Conversations
• Home School Legal Defense Association
• Homeschool Freedom in your state
• Homeschool World
• Homeschooling Today
• State Homeschool Organizations
• The Old Schoolhouse
• The Teaching Home

• Publications
• Get Involved

The Academic and Social Benefits of Homeschooling

Homeschooling works. The roughly 2 million children who currently learn at home join a millennia-old practice supported by many government officials, scholars, college officials, and employers.

While mainstream America has embraced homeschooling as a viable and positive educational option—and as 55 million K-12 students and their parents have been thrust into “crisis-teaching at home”—the angst of some academics over homeschooling has abruptly emerged.

Professors Elizabeth Bartholet of Harvard University and James Dwyer of William and Mary School of Law organized a summer meeting to “focus on problems of educational deprivation and child maltreatment that too often occur under the guise of homeschooling, in a legal environment of minimal or no oversight.” In a highly controversial article in Harvard Magazine , Erin O’Donnell advanced Bartholet’s arguments in favor of a homeschooling ban.

Yet, what does the evidence tell us about homeschool educational and social outcomes? Is there any sound corpus of evidence that homeschooled children are actually educationally deprived or maltreated? And what worldview drives anti-homeschoolers such as Bartholet and Dwyer?

Most reviews of homeschooling research reveal generally positive learning outcomes for children.

Joseph Murphy and Brian Ray provide quite optimistic reviews, while other appraisals present positive, albeit more tentative , conclusions. A one-of-its-kind review of only peer-reviewed research by Ray revealed that 11 of the 14 peer-reviewed studies on academic achievement found that homeschool students significantly outperformed conventionally schooled children. Both of the publicly available state-provided data sets showed higher-than-average test scores for homeschooled children.

A similar pattern emerges for the social, emotional, and psychological development of the homeschooled.

The clear majority of peer-reviewed studies show that homeschoolers often have better parent-child relationships and friendships than conventionally schooled children. Homeschoolers are happy, satisfied, and civically engaged .

A growing body of research indicates that graduates of home-based education excel. Eleven of the 16 peer-reviewed studies on success into adulthood (including college) showed that homeschoolers had better results for political tolerance, college GPA, and college retention than students in conventional schools. After reviewing the relevant literature, Gloeckner and Jones concluded that the “comparative results of the studies reported in this review, combined with the data collected from college admission officers provide evidence that homeschooling is an effective alternative path to college for the children of many families.”

Homeschoolers are not being educationally deprived, maltreated, or abused. On the contrary, the research literature suggests that rates of abuse (e.g., physical abuse, sexual abuse, neglect) are lower among homeschoolers than institutionally schooled children.

Although there are certainly cases when homeschoolers are abused (and such cases should be prosecuted), banning homeschooling is not the answer, nor will it improve education or make children safer.

As a society we do not, for example, close public schools when a child is abused there. When scholars like Bartholet, Fineman and Worthington, and Dwyer and Peters advocate for a total or presumptive ban on homeschooling, they do so without solid support from the empirical literature. When Bartholet and others advocate for forcing children to enter the public school system, they are ignoring evidence that only approximately 40 percent of conventionally schooled students are at, or above, proficiency in reading and mathematics.

Certainly, many public educators are engaged in terrific efforts to provide high-quality education, but it is also clear that the public school system has significant limitations.

Why, then, do some academics want more government control and restrictions on homeschooling? We think it is not hard to perceive: They do not approve of the values and beliefs of the parents who choose to homeschool.

One of us partially addressed the answer in a scholarly journal some years ago. Ray identified four classes of negativity toward parent-led home-based education. Some scholars make theoretical arguments that government schools are the gold standard of education that advances the common good, while private schooling is bad for society. A second group argues that homeschooling is an attempt to “cocoon” one’s children from ideas and people that the parents disdain. Another category holds that homeschooling harms children philosophically, psychologically, religiously, physically, and educationally. And the fourth group goes against homeschooling by theorizing why the state should have more domination over children and their parents.

In the end, however, all of those categories of opposition are founded on different values, beliefs, and presuppositions than those at the core of parent-led homeschooling. Dwyer and Peters , for example, presuppose that “[t]he state must have the ultimate authority to determine what children’s interests are” and that the state is the entity that shall decide over what aspects of a child’s life his parents have authority.

In a similar vein, Bartholet argues that the state, not the parent, shall have the ultimate authority to decide what and how children shall be taught. Parents, in her world, must prove to the state that they deserve permission to educate their children outside of the government’s control. Fineman’s philosophical zeal is so clear that anything other than state-funded and state-controlled education must be banned by the government.

These kinds of ideas simply stem from their philosophical and religious worldviews. It is “natural” for them to conclude that the civil government must control children’s teaching, training, and indoctrination. It is natural because their worldviews cannot comprehend or tolerate a worldview such as classical liberalism or Christianity that holds the state should not control boys’ and girls’ educational formation, unless parents are abusive.

While the relevant research has limitations , scholarly research shows that homeschooling has positive outcomes for children. There is certainly no body of clear evidence that homeschooling undermines children’s academic and social development and should be restricted. Certain academics’ agitation over homeschooling appears to be based on their perspective that the state—and not parents—should control the education of all children.

Compared to conventional students, homeschool graduates are more likely to

• have higher college GPAs,
• be politically tolerant,
• be agreeable and conscientious,
• have a more positive college experience, and
• be self-employed.

In summary, opponents of homeschooling lack empirical data for their arguments, and judges and governmental officials consistently hold that parents have the right to educate their children at home.

Those arguing for state domination lost their major battles in legislatures, courts, and the public mind in the 1980s and 1990s. Homeschooling advocates have strong support in protecting their freedom to educate outside state-run systems.

College personnel, employers, and independent business advocates should be glad about homeschooling. It is a form of free enterprise. It costs taxpayers less than public schooling and its graduates are well-equipped to be the next generation of entrepreneurs, leaders, parents, householders, creators, and everyday citizens. In summary, we agree with U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s analysis of this issue: “The risk to children is not from homeschooling. The risk is from radical leftist scholars seeking to impose their values on our children.”

Brian D. Ray, Ph.D., is president of the National Home Education Research Institute and is internationally known for his research on homeschooling.

Carlos Valiente, Ph.D., is a Professor in the T. Denny Sanford School of Social and Family Dynamics at Arizona State University.

May 13, 2020 › Academics , Politicization

More Articles

› Academics , Politicization

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection

‘Homeschooling’ and the COVID-19 Crisis: The Insights of Parents on Curriculum and Remote Learning

Daniela fontenelle-tereshchuk.

Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB Canada

The COVID-19 crisis forced schools to temporarily close from March 2020 to June 2020, producing unpredictable changes in instructional contexts and patterns. A new concept of ‘homeschooling’ emerged which required parents to support the implementation of the curriculum through remote learning. This article is based on a case study focusing on the perceptions of experiences of ten parents of Elementary school children during the school lockdown in Alberta, Canada. Parents argue that the schools’ demands on them were unreasonable. These added to the stress of the quarantine and professional losses, and to the burden of working full-time, fulfilling household responsibilities, and having children rely mostly on parents to deliver an often brief, ‘shallow’ weekly lesson plan that lacked clear expectations and reliable assessment pieces. Parents also strongly cast doubts on the popular reliability of online education by suggesting the unsuitability of online tools to promote independent learning among young children. The study may provide valuable contributions to further inform how to better support learning from home during this ongoing pandemic.

Introduction

The year 2020 has been challenging for education. The current world crisis caused by the spread of the coronavirus has impacted the lives of everyone and changed patterns of living. Education has been greatly affected by an unpredictable reality of changing the conceptualization of home education, or what we will refer to as ‘homeschooling’.

This case study is an account of the perceptions of experiences of ten parents of children in K-6 Elementary French programs in three different school boards: Calgary Catholic School District (CCSD), Calgary Board of Education (CBE), commonly known as public schools, and Francophone School Board, in Alberta, Canada. The article is divided into four different main themes as well as subsequent sub-themes emerging from the data: The perceptions of the experiences of parents with ‘homeschooling’; the perceptions of the experiences of parents with language instruction; the perceptions of the experiences of parents with remote learning; and the perceptions of the experiences of parents on the importance of social interaction.

Literature Review

Parental support is an important factor in children’s education. According to Amaral ( 2007 ) and Sedibe and Fourie ( 2018 ), parental support enhances children’s learning and plays an essential role in their academic success. Some parents, who have the time, pedagogical skills, and resources, may choose to homeschool their children.

However, what happened in many homes in Canada is unprecedented and was a circumstantial ‘homeschooling’ choice imposed on parents caused by the fact schools were temporarily closed and learning moved from in-person to remote schooling from March 2020 to June 2020 in Alberta. A survey shows that the great majority of Canadian parents with children ranging between 4 years and 11 years old were extremely concerned about having to support their child’s education and providing childcare at the same time as maintaining a working life (Statistics Canada 2020 ). It points to the fact that many children’s daily activities were screen time related, perhaps not only due to schooling, but also a reflection of the struggle families had to manage a work-life without child support during this pandemic (Statistics Canada 2020 ).

Homeschooling, in the sense that parents educate their children in what they believe is important to pass on to new generations, has been around for centuries prior to the establishment of a formal educational system (Semali 1999 ). With indigenous peoples, for instance, elders have taught youngsters how to live well and survive in their environment through hunting, fishing, and supporting each other by playing a positive role in the daily welfare of their community (Bruchac 2014 ). In this ‘informal’ educational system, “the knowledge generated is passed on from one generation to the next in the oral mode” (George 1999 , p. 80).

In Canada, formal or traditional homeschooling, defined as “an alternative method of learning that takes place outside the school environment, where parents deliver courses and programs of learning to their children” (Statistics Canada 2018 ), is legal in all provinces and territories. In other words, homeschooling is a choice made by some parents to educate their children at home following provincial educational regulations. Provinces have different regulations on the freedom parents have over the planning and implementation of the curriculum in the homeschooling program (Van Pelt 2015 ).

However, what happened in many households during the March–June school lockdown cannot be characterized as ‘traditional homeschooling’ as parents did not choose to teach their children at home. This new ‘homeschooling’ process or model was created by the unexpected and urgent circumstances during this period. In Alberta, a lockdown was established to contain the spread of the new coronavirus that had impacted the lives of many worldwide. Schools were closed between March and June of 2020 (Alberta Education 2020a , b ), and in this case, the education of children in Elementary schools relied on remote learning and parents becoming ‘teachers’ aids’ who supported the lesson plans sent home.

The parents in this study opted to have their children in one of the French language-based programs in Alberta. French language programs are offered in different formats such as French Immersion Programs and Francophone (Alberta Education 2020b ). According to Alberta Education ( 2020b ), the Francophone program is mainly meant for French-speaking families. Differently, in French Immersion programs, parents are not required to have previous knowledge of the French language. Students are expected to be fluent in the French language after attending the K-12 French Immersion schools.

Parents play an important role in students’ academic achievements, and their inputs are key to improve education (Amaral 2007 ; Chen and Harris 2009 ). Although, Sedibe and Fourie ( 2018 ) note that “the lack of avenues for parent involvement, inadequate parent empowerment, insufficient interaction amongst parents and ineffectual school communication” are challenges often perceived in school-parents partnership processes (p. 436).

Schools as a whole including students, teachers, and parents experienced a variety of challenges imposed by the rapid changes in learning and teaching patterns during the temporary closure of schools due to the coronavirus pandemic, and specific literature in education on this topic is still scarce. Teachers, in particular, struggled to have to quickly adapt their planning and teaching approaches to remote learning and partnership with parents to implement the curriculum.

John ( 2006 ) suggests that teachers, especially more experienced ones, do not always write daily detailed lesson plans and mostly rely on their extensive experience to improvise as pedagogical opportunities arise. Wiggins and McTighe ( 2005 ) as well as Borich ( 2007 ) point to the importance of effective lesson planning in learning outcomes. An effective lesson plan reflects a clear and well-thought learning design, which promotes engagement and favors differentiated learning opportunities, and is aligned with the curriculum standards as well as formative and summative learning responsive assessment pieces (Borich 2007 ; Cicek and Tok 2014 ; Wiggins and McTighe 2005 ). Borich ( 2007 ) and Cicek and Tok ( 2014 ) remind us that teachers are key to the implementation of educational policies and any goals seeking to improve education outcomes. They draw attention to teaching effectiveness and the relevance of the process of lesson planning as

a combination of lesson objective designing, teaching, modeling, checking for understanding, re-teaching, and teacher’s self-reflection, lesson plan is a crucial element in the process of meeting national content standards and optimizing the outcome of classroom teaching and learning. (Cicek and Tok 2014 , p. 11).

Alberta classrooms, as in other parts of Canada, have grown increasingly more diverse (Briscoe and Pollock 2017 ). Having an inclusive approach to teaching, which includes “all children regardless of ability level are included in classrooms with their age-matched peers” (Sokal and Sharma 2013 , p. 59), is key to successful learning outcomes (McCrimmon 2015 ; Gray et al. 2017 ). However, ineffective teacher preparation and training to respond to the diverse needs of students have been a concern and contributed to the increased stress level of teachers, raising concerns of mental health issues among teachers (Gray et al. 2017 ).

The challenges imposed by the need for continuous professional growth to meet the demands of diverse learners, which certainly increased during the pandemic, are not always properly addressed by teacher preparation programs and/or professional development practices (McCrimmon 2015 ; Gray et al. 2017 ). According to McCrimmon ( 2015 ), the “majority of nascent teachers are underprepared for teaching in modern classrooms containing diverse learners without additional training or experience” (p. 235). Research suggests that “teaching efficacy is a context-specific construct” (Sokal and Sharma 2013 , p. 60), which might indicate that teachers’ pedagogical needs might be intrinsically connected to individualized classroom contexts. For instance, Gray et al. ( 2017 ) and Sokal and Sharma ( 2013 ) suggest that teachers, who received specific training and developed abilities to teach in inclusive environments, improved their teaching performance.

Interestingly, Oliver et al. ( 2012 ) remark that “typically when the generational gap in technology is discussed it puts students on one side of the gap and teachers on the other with a clear demarcation based on age and assumed experience” (p. 284). The use of technology for learning purposes is not a novelty to teachers in Alberta (Alberta Education 2013 ; CBE 2020 ); however, the context and needed reliance on technology for teaching purposes exercised during this pandemic was unprecedented. Alberta Education ( 2013 ) provides educators with a few recommendations on important aspects that have an impact on learning experiences when teaching in an online environment, such as providing students with clear feedback on assignments, the importance of creating a growth mindset among students, providing students “with choice within a safe learning environment that encourages measured risk-taking and innovation” (p. 20), and creating a collaborative work environment for more complex learning tasks.

The U.S. Department of Education ( 2017 ) points to the inadequate use of technology to provide learning opportunities to students outside of the school environment. It suggests that teachers might not feel they have the necessary skills to confidently pursue the use of technology for continuous learning purposes in the classroom and beyond. This factor could explain why some parents in this study noticed that teachers showed a tendency to rely heavily on pre-made materials as opposed to using technology in their lesson planning to construct authentic learning opportunities for students. Such practice may accentuate the problematic technology usage divide “between learners who are using technology in active, creative ways to support their learning and those who predominantly use technology for passive content consumption” (U.S. Department of Education 2017 , p. 7).

Beyerbach et al. ( 2001 ) point to the complexity of the process of infusing technology as a tool for learning, arguing that such a process “takes time, support, and collaboration” (p. 107).

Some important aspects should be considered to improve the use of technology in classrooms, such as providing educators with practical pedagogical opportunities to gain an understanding of how technology tools could be incorporated in their teaching in an active manner, and the necessary theoretical and modeling support through professional development initiatives and/or courses focused on helping teachers to reflect on why and how the integration of technology in the classroom could and should be done (Beyerbach et al. 2001 ).

Oliver et al. ( 2012 ) agree that although the infusion of technology in people’s daily lives has become increasingly more evident in recent years as in the case of cellphones, which are used widely not only as a mean of communication but also as a tool incorporated in daily routines such as a calendar or an alarm clock to manage time, technology has not found its niche in active and constructive instructional utilization in learning environments.

Concerns with teacher preparedness and pedagogical support reflected in the creation and implementation of lesson plans, which clearly apply technology reflectively and actively as a diverse and inclusive tool for learning, are evident (Beyerbach et al. 2001 ; McCrimmon 2015 ; Oliver et al. 2012 ). Another important concern would be the teachers’ necessary understanding of the ‘social, ethical, legal, and human’ implications of the use of technology in classrooms (Oliver et al. 2012 ). For instance, an educational resource copyright lawsuit between publishers and provinces forced about 300 teachers to have to retroactively provide 7 years’ worth of lesson plans (Stackelberg 2019 ). This could also have some other implications as such pre-made materials are most likely decontextualized.

Other challenges with the use of technology for educational purposes have also become evident during the coronavirus crisis. The potential excessive use of screen time by Elementary school-aged children during the lockdown was one of the most important concerns among sixty- four percent of parents surveyed by Statistics Canada ( 2020 ). The survey also shows that social interaction was a major concern as parents indicated that isolation might have a negative effect on their children’s overall behavior and mental health.

The current pandemic may test the popular effectiveness attributes associated with the use of technology in education. For instance, media post claims such as “research suggests that online learning has been shown to increase retention of information, and take less time, meaning the changes coronavirus have caused might be here to stay” (Li and Lalani 2020 ), may influence popular views on the effectiveness of online education as we are going through this crisis.

Alberta Education ( 2013 ) supports that “technology serves as an enabler and accelerator of the type of learning that research says works best” (p. 11). However, the impact of the use of technology for educational purposes by young children, especially between the ages of 5 to 9 years old is still unclear due to the shortage of studies addressing the topic (Holloway et al. 2013 ).

Ultimately, some literature suggests that excessive use of screen time by young children may lead to physical and mental health issues (Martin 2011 ; Rosen et al. 2014 ). It is recommended that elementary school-aged children should not be exposed to technology for more than 2 h daily (Martin 2011 ). Research also suggests that parents play a key role in how much exposure to technology children have, especially young ones (Joshi and Shukla 2019 ; Teuwen et al. 2012 ). For instance, Teuwen et al. ( 2012 ) note that “preschoolers whose mother obtains a higher level of education, are more likely to have had any online experience but less likely to use the Internet frequently” (p. 17).

Methodology

As previously mentioned in Fontenelle-Tereshchuk ( 2020b ), this case study explored the insights of ten parents of children in French language programs during the March–June 2020 school lockdown in Alberta. A case study design was chosen because it allows for an in-depth exploration of the collective and uniqueness of these parents' perceived reality of events during the school lockdown (Yin 2009 ). Focusing on the data to inform the findings of this study was important to address my bias as a parent, a schoolteacher, and a scholar.

The study applied mostly qualitative methods: A structured 8-question background survey meant to provide some statistical background information; a semi-structured 10-question individual questionnaire; and a focus group interview consisting of 3 open-ended questions, which prompted and guided a discussion among the parents (Creswell 2012 ). The focus group interview was audio-recorded via ZOOM and later transcribed.

The data was sorted and color-coded by emerging common themes in a wallmap format (Creswell 2012 ), facilitating the necessary recurring access to the data and the analyses. The data was collected in the beginning of the summer of 2020. The study is unfunded and received the approval from the Conjoint Faculties Research Ethics Board (CFREB) at the University of Calgary.

The participants were recruited through an online recruiting post on the University of Calgary website and networking. The study required participants to be parents or guardians of Elementary school children in one of the French language programs in Alberta. It is important to notice that parents with children in Elementary French programs in Alberta are part of a minority group. To keep the confidentiality of the participants, pseudonyms replaced the participants’ real names.

Limitations

The study offers an insightful view of Elementary school parents’ perspectives on the educational challenges of teaching and learning during the 2020 school lockdown in Alberta. While the experiences of these parents might resonate with many other parents in Alberta and/or around the world, the study is limited statistically due to its contextualized sample size.

The parents in this study strongly argue that remote learning does not promote independent learning and is not suitable for Elementary school-aged children. They think of technology as a tool that when/if well-utilized can be helpful to facilitate learning; however, it is not a replacement for teachers. These parents suggest that the main focus of teaching during the lockdown was the technology itself, and not the curriculum and the teaching and learning process. Teachers and schools might have mistakenly believed that if children had access to technology and knew how to mechanically use it, they would independently learn through remote learning. The perceived experiences of these parents during the schools’ closure between March–June 2020 contradict this assumption.

The parents point to necessary changes in the way teachers are trained and the support they need to continue growing their skills in creating contextualized and engaging lesson plans with clear expectations and integrated assessment tailored to students’ specific needs and utilizing technology in an informed and active manner. Parents also draw attention to the importance of recognizing and utilizing parental support in children’s education, indicating a need for improvement of collaborative practices between parents and schools.

Parents, Themes, and Sub-themes

It is important to notice that none of the parents reported a lack of access to the technology students needed to learn from home, and in the context of this study, it is assumed that students had the technology needed available during this process. Parents might have other children at home, and the ones reported in this study were only those attending the Elementary schools in a French program, assumed to be 5 years to 11 years old.

The following summary of the parents’ backgrounds is mostly based on the answers to the survey questions. It is intended to provide an understanding of the different contexts as well as a brief parental demographic overview.

The following themes and sub-themes emerged mostly from the individual questionnaires and the focus-group interview.

The Perceptions of the Experiences of Parents with ‘Homeschooling’

Many have referred to the phenomenon of teaching from home during the lockdown as home-based education or ‘homeschooling’, that is to say, a partnership between schools and parents to support children’s continuing education while schools were temporarily closed.

In terms of teachers’ instruction, parents strongly argue that there was an apparent assumption that Elementary school children would be able to manage the technology and work independently on the assignments and that the support required from parents would be minimal.

Parents as Partners: A Failed Communication Approach

Parents were asked to take on an important role as the main support of this ‘homeschooling’ process. What could have been a true partnership, where schools and parents would communicate well and be aware of each other needs and suggestions, establishing a clear and constructive channel of communication, did not happen. For many parents, this process was physically and mentally exhausting as well as a frustrating task.

The communication between teachers and parents was for the most part via email. Feedback on assignments was vague and often not helpful to guide parents on how well their children were doing and which areas they had to improve. As Macy explains that.

Through these entire three and half months, we may be submitted five things to the teachers to view, [emphasizing with gesture showing 5 fingers] Five things! And there was not feedback that was of any meaningful, they [teachers] were like “Yeah, you did what you were asked to do” and that’s it! And I was expecting a little more feedback because the feedback of me for my son is not as meaningful as the teacher’s feedback. (data extract).

Nate also has some important remarks about the ineffective use of communication by Alberta Education and school boards with regards to parents. She says.

I think there was a big [pause], a big part that was missing. The Alberta Education to parents and the school boards to parents as well with regards to time expectations because the Alberta government was not expecting the kids to be in schools from 9 [am] until 3 [pm] on-at-home environment. So, I think that the [lack of the] communication piece also [pause] [contributed to] coming to this. (data extract).

Balancing Work Responsibilities and ‘Homeschooling’

The great majority of parents in this study felt overwhelmed trying to balance their professional obligations with their responsibility to support their children’s emotional and academic needs, especially during a perceived financial crisis when many had lost their jobs and/or were trying to get back into the job market while others were afraid of losing their current jobs.

Jessica, a full-time working mother, suggests that the educational system could have provided better support for children, not relying on busy and untrained parents as the main teaching support source. As she explains that.

For math, they [her children/students] got some PowerPoints that they were supposed to read. So luckily their father [her children’s father] is a math ‘wiz’. So, he started to teach them every single day for an hour because after a few weeks, he realized that ‘these kids are going to forget absolutely everything’. We both work full-time, and I have been in the office [ah] still every day, so it was all up to the dad to work on this. And I could help after I would get from home [work], which was too late, and the things were already done by that time. And so, I find it, it just not doable we can’t be here instead of the educational system. (data extract).

Carol, a stay–at–home mother, suggests that she also had to step in and buy extra teaching supplies and rely on her teaching skills to support her Kindergarten child during this ‘homeschooling’ process. As she explains that.

She [her daughter] goes to Francophone school, so there were a lot of links sent to me and I used the materials quite a lot when I was ‘homeschooling’ her. So, it worked quite well. So, I bought lots of books on the market place. On KIJIJI, people who were selling French books, people that didn’t need them. So, I would go to find the deals and, I just bought a lot of French books and worked from that as well. So, I used my own resources as well as the stuff online [provided by teachers]. (data extract).

DDM627, a full-time health-care worker, suggests that not all parents have the skills and the required time availability to take on the responsibility of ‘homeschooling’ their children.

He/she argues that.

My experience trying to motivate my kids and have them focus on schoolwork has proven to me that homeschooling would not be for our family. Also, working full time has made it challenging timewise. (data extract).

KMacB, a full-time working mother, also agrees that the ‘homeschooling’ model used by schools, which relied mainly on parents to implement the curriculum, was ineffective. KMacB says she is “not in favour of home-based education” as the one they had during the lockdown.

She seems to welcome in-person learning experiences for Elementary students with social distancing health rules in place.

Underestimated Parental Support Needed

The parents in this study strongly suggest that there was an over-reliance on parents to mainly implement the ‘homeschooling’ curriculum during the lockdown, disregarding the fact that many parents do not have the pedagogical skills and need to work to support their families.

This could be due to the fact that little is known of the use of technology for learning purposes among young children (Holloway et al. 2013 ).

Anni, a full-time working mother, explains that her Grade 2 daughter’s teacher did a good job providing the students with pre-recorded videos to support a research project in Social Studies. Even though that was helpful, it still did not lead to engagement and independent remote learning, and parental support was essential to complete the assignment. She argues that.

And so, I think she [teacher] tried her best, but I don’t think this is optimal in any way for young children. But no matter how, [frustrated gesture] we can discuss how to optimize and stuff like this but it just NOT, it is not an optimal system for learning. (data extract).

KMacB speaks to the struggles parents faced keeping the continuing pace of school learning without the necessary pedagogic knowledge. It is important to notice that when parents enroll their children in the French Immersion program, they are not required to be French speakers (Alberta Education 2020b ).

My youngest daughter [Grade 1] was doing very well. At the moment, we are struggling to continue with her learning and her reading skills are not progressing nearly as well as I would have expected them to in school. She simply isn’t exposed to the language enough and that is a big concern for us. I believe she is losing interest in reading in French because her progress is so slow. The fact that I am trying to teach a 7-year-old to read in a language that I don’t speak or understand is crazy. (data extract).

Ralph, a stay–at–home father, notes that the challenges of ‘homeschooling’ during the lockdown for stay–at–home parents were also evident. He explains that “I found it hard to balance homework with other household chores especially since I do not speak French” (data extract).

Macy, a currently unemployed mother, “agree[s] [that] the amount of help that grade two students need from parents is really big in this curriculum” (data extract).

Jessica, a home-office commuting full-time working mother, speaks of her hopes for Fall 2020. She says that.

I really hope that in the Fall, we will do the best as a society to put them [children/students] back in school because this is bad! [pause] just…[pause] for the rest of us as adults it’s bad to be isolated, it is bad for the kids as well. And I feel that brings a [deep breath followed by a pause] spring is going deteriorate by [students/her children] doing absolutely nothing and, I will try to give them books to read. But I am not an expert to give them [her children] all the online tools, and quite frankly, I come home tired from work and I am expecting the educational system to do it [to teach]. (data extract).

Myths About Remote Learning: “The Older Children Versus Younger Children”

There has also been an apparent assumption that older students, in the case of this study perhaps students in Grade 5–6, or 10 to 11 years old, would be more independent learning remotely and not require as much support from teachers and/or parents compared to younger children in Grades K-4, or 5 to 9 years old. The parents in this study suggest that this is not always the case, as many factors come into play in the context of Elementary school children, such as subjects, emotional conditions, special needs, etc..

DDM627 argues that depending on the subject, her two daughters experienced different learning challenges and outcomes with remote learning. She notes that.

Between my 2 girls, I would say they were average, above average. [pause] [They are] still in early grades so this isn’t really a focus. But I would say my younger one is doing worse when it comes to speaking French…the older one, reading…. But math probably did not change. (data extract).

Jessica refers to the potentially complex individual household contexts, and how that might also have influenced remote learning. She notes that.

I feel that there were so many different combinations of the family situations, there were no families that would not face[d] challenges. And yet, somebody would be in the office; like somebody in some families, both parents were working at home; and some [ah] both parents lost [their] jobs. So, small kids, big kids, and everybody had it difficult in [ah] different ways. (data extract).

KMacB has an older child in Grade 5 with special needs who required significant parental support for academic and emotional matters during this ‘homeschooling’ process. She explains that.

Our eldest daughter (grade 5) was an average student. She has required far more parent support than we expected, and the content provided by her teacher has FAR exceeded the government’s recommended 1 h/day. I definitely see a loss of confidence since moving to online learning. It also took MANY weeks for her to adapt to receiving a weeks’ worth of content all at once.

Carol, a Kindergarten mother, believes remote learning is not ideal for young children as her child could not focus during the remote learning classes. She argues that, for example, learning about animals by visiting a ‘virtual’ zoo video did not seem to engage her daughter in learning, and that she needed hands-on experiences. Carol also explains that her child was still getting used to the school environment and routines, so the fostered learning parental support she received during this process played a positive role in improving her academic skills.

The Perceptions of the Experiences of Parents with Language Instruction

The parents’ language role.

French is one of the two official languages in Canada. Many programs are available to foster students’ interest in learning the French language and culture (Alberta Education 2020b ). One of these programs is the Francophone program that is mainly intended to support minority Francophone families, but also other members of the community with a French language background.

Most parents of students in the Francophone program can speak French as in the case of Carol, who argued that her Kindergarten child improved her language skills during the lockdown. Carol, a stay–at–home mother, used her teaching skills to teach and also her own money to purchase appropriate extra teaching materials to support her child’s learning. She argues that her child was too young and shy as she had just started attending school for a few months before the school closure. Carol says.

I speak French, so I was able to help her [her kindergarten daughter] learn the language and ah [pause] when she went to kindergarten, she didn’t know anything in French and by the end of being ‘homeschooled’, she started reading in French and learning words and vocabulary. So, she [her daughter] was learning quite quickly at home as opposed to a classroom setting where the teacher per se 20 kid or so; when here I am just [for] her, of course my little 3-year-old [presumed other child] doesn’t do any ‘schooling’ now, which [pause] so I was focused pretty much on her. (data extract).

All the other parents had children in the French Immersion program, where parents are not required to speak French. One of these parents was Anni, who spoke French and whose child is a second-grader in a Calgary Catholic School District school. She noticed that her child struggled and needed support to finish school assignments. Anni believes that remote learning is not ideal and supported the safe return to in-person classes as she and her partner work full-time and finding the extra-time to mainly support their children at home was overwhelmingly difficult.

Gio argues that “the main challenge was not knowing French to teach and help my 10-year- old son and finding the time to do that between all the other things I do at home” (data extract). Her words might summarise the feelings of many parents during this ‘homeschooling’ process.

DDM627, another parent who did not speak French, notes that “educationally, I’m sure their French language skills are suffering…[pause] it’s like an extra-long summer vacation where French is minimal” (data extract).

The Lack of Language Support

Another issue identified by these parents was the lack of effective language support as most of their children are in the French Immersion program, which does not necessarily require parents to speak French (Alberta Education 2020b ). KMacB, for instance, remarks that.

With only one ‘weak’ French-speaking adult in the home, we struggled to both help the children with their schoolwork, as well as to expose them to French. Balancing working from home and helping our 2 elementary children with their schoolwork was very challenging. There were simply not enough hours in the day for us to parent, teach, submit their work, and do our career work. This model is unsustainable. (data extract) Nate, a full-time working mother, suggests that expecting parents, especially in non-French-speaking households, to mainly support ‘homeschooling’ during the lockdown was one of the biggest challenges.

She remarks that.

I will just say that ahh [pause] that ‘one’ [pause] the biggest challenges is that we do not speak French ourselves at our house, so having our kids speaking French and hearing French during COVID has been a big challenge. (data extract).

The great majority of the eight parents in this same program whose children attend public schools did not speak French. Overall, they felt overwhelmed to be in the position of being the main provider of instruction in a language most of them did not speak. Teachers provided an average of an hour weekly of remote learning instruction, and asked parents to support the daily activities sent home in French, and sometimes in English in the weekly lesson plan.

For instance, Karen, a full-time working mother and one of the three parents in the study that could speak French, argues that as a full-time worker, she found it challenging to attend to the degree of parental teaching support required by the remote learning in her child’s school.

She believes her child will be fine academically as she is still in the initial grades, but she agrees that the average of an hour weekly of provided remote teacher instruction was not ideal and should be reconsidered in the future. Karen remarks.

I was personally working that time-period during the pandemic, so I was the only one who speaks French in our house, so I had to help our daughter during that time. I found that quite difficult [nervous smile] help her during the day, so becomes the time really to do it at night and, growing frustration in both her and myself. (data extract).

The Perceptions of the Experiences of Parents with Curriculum and Remote Learning

Teachers and curriculum: misunderstandings of technology purpose.

Parents’ perceptions of what approaches worked best are of key importance in moving forward. The parents suggest that technology alone, without strong teaching, social and emotional support, does not work well with Elementary school-aged children. That is to say, technology is a teaching tool that if well-utilized, can facilitate learning.

KMacB notes that there was an apparent overreliance on technology for teaching purposes, and also an assumption that students could independently manage and self-teach themselves through technology. She remarks.

Neither of our children was as independent as their teachers seemed to think they should be. Likely partly stress-related, but also unrealistic expectations around what they [children] could and could not do. There simply wasn’t enough instructional time with their teachers. (data extract).

Nate notes that technology itself seemed to have been the main focus during this process.

She suggests that teachers did not seem very well-prepared to technically utilize the different types of online platforms available and struggled to manage to teach using technology as a tool. Nate says.

Another big challenge for us has been the diverse forms of presentations that the students [hum correcting] that their teachers are giving. It’s been a lot of technical challenges as opposed to the language challenges, not a lot of focus on the language but more on the technical. So that would be my thoughts. (data extract).

Gio points to the need to better utilize technology as a tool for teaching and learning in a pedagogically organized manner as opposed to relying on technology to ‘replace’ the instructional role of teachers, which could potentially affect the differentiated need of catering teaching to the unique classroom contexts. Gio remarks.

I do really believe the schools tried to come up with good technology solutions to help with the learning but to have a teacher supervise and be there to explain subjects it is the best way to teach and learn. (data extract).

Nate argues that assignment timing flexibility was also a factor missing in the lesson plans that impacted learning in her household. As she explains that.

And the quiz times were very specific, and they didn’t have a lot of flexibility given our family needed a lot of flexibility. So, that would have been nice if they could have used more of the flexibility and had more resources. (data extract).

Carol sees the benefits of using online resources, but she argues that even when such resources are useful, they are still limited when it comes to the value associated with personal learning interactions, especially among Kindergarteners. Carol explains that.

The online stuff [resources] was quite useful but moving forward I would recommend using more the online tools. I think the best way they learn is hearing the language, being with their friends and their teachers, hearing it absorbing the sounds, the phrases, and being involved, having them communicate with their friends. (data extract).

DDM627 believes that one–on–one conversations are important even in the ‘online’ or virtual classroom. As he/she argues that.

The more video calls, especially 1:1 conversation, the better with my kids. Forces them to listen to and speak French, in a non-intimidating environment. Neither of my kids tend to speak up in groups naturally. (data extract).

Karen agrees that children need more interaction with teachers. She says that.

The time they [teachers] did [interact with the kids] was good because it was reading for the most part. They [teachers] had each student with groups, small groups of four or five children, and then they would be reading from a book, and they would each take turns, but just [short pause] it wasn’t enough for [in] my opinion. (data extract).

Nate suggests that schools when using remote learning should focus more “maybe it have been better to focus on math and literacy” (data extract). She also adds that her oldest daughter responded well to her teacher’s efforts to interact using technology when it was used more interactively. She says that.

And [the teacher] really made an effort to make a connection with the kids and they were doing sort of things like ‘her [daughter’s] favorite thing’… and [ah] that they [children/students] had around the house and bring their favorite stuffy to class’ and those kids’ kind of things. (data extract).

Curriculum Design: Disconnected ‘Chunks’ as Opposed to a Wholly Integrated Learning Plan

After mental health (Fontenelle-Tereshchuk 2020b ), the ineffective use of pedagogical approaches to teaching and learning during the lockdown was one of the main issues for these parents.

The parents in this study suggest that the curriculum was mainly delivered as ‘chunks’ according to the available pre-made ‘one-size-fits-all’ online resources that not always had a clear learning purpose. The lesson planning often resembled ‘instructional notes’ style format, missing important connecting pieces, such as clear curriculum learning objectives and an associated assessment piece. Such overall lesson planning was usually sent all together at the beginning of the week.

KMacB speaks of the challenges that she faced trying to manage the large amounts of content sent all at once. She suggests that it was up to the parents to re-plan or personalize the implementation of the curriculum according to their children’s differentiated needs timewise. She explains that.

Receiving the content weekly was challenging as the kids were unable to break the work down into manageable daily “chunks” and we had to spend time at the start of each week figuring out how to break the assignments down into reasonable daily accomplishments. (data extracts).

Nate argues that such disconnection and lack of effective planning could easily be felt in the online assignments. She explains that her children were receiving pre-made ‘one-size-fits-all’ online materials, sometimes in English but were being assessed in French for these assignments. She remarks that.

I do not think that [teachers] really utilized the D2L platform, in terms of giving students quizzes or having them to submit assignments. And I was also a little frustrated at times when the students [corrects herself] my children were receiving videos in English to learn the concepts in English, the videos were in English! [suggesting the students were assessed in French]. (data extract).

Another issue was the weekly instructional time, which in most public schools varied from 1 h weekly to 30 min every other week, leaving it up to parents to make up for the extra needed instructional support children required. Occasionally, instructional videos were made by some teachers and sent home. In these rare opportunities, parents found that it worked well and alleviated some of the pressure on them.

Jessica was critical of what she perceived as the difference among schools, and perhaps school boards’ teaching and learning approach during the lockdown. She claims that some school boards were more effective than others. Jessica remarks.

I chose the public [school] system because I think that the public system is as capable as the private and we should not settle for less. Our teachers are as equals and educated as to the teachers from the private sector and I would like them to step up and show us what they can do. Just like in the other schools, where the teachers could figure it out. I hope they [students] will go to school; I hope we don’t ever have to learn this [again]. And we can silver line back and forth but it the end they [students] didn’t learn what they were supposed to learn. (data extract).

Nate points to the lack of consistency and contextualization as well as differentiated learning approaches felt throughout this process, impacting students’ engagement in learning. KMacB and Nate suggest that the responsibility of the ineffective learning outcomes of this lockdown process can not solely be bestowed on teachers, but a combined responsibility of levels of education bodies such as Alberta Education, school boards, and schools. KMacB explains that.

I think the school boards have to make a much bigger commitment to providing “real”, teacher-led learning opportunities for the students most of the time. Perhaps that means consistent delivery of curriculum during the pandemic. So that if we need to move back to remote learning, a centralized team can curate the content and the classroom teachers can spend more time with the students. (data extract).

The ‘Disconnection’ in the Use of Technology Tools for Teaching and Learning Purposes

Another important point in this study was the utilization of technology available to teach and most importantly to interact with children. The parents claim that teachers’ planning was often ‘shallow’ and missed the potential offered by technology to provide more interactive learning opportunities for students. For example, KMacB argues that “the instructions were in the Google Classroom for the kid/parents to read and that just does not align with the learning styles of children” (data extract).

The technology tools used during the pandemic were not a novelty for many teachers as many of these tools may have been available to teachers and students to support learning prior to this pandemic, but not every teacher chooses or knows how to utilize them for teaching purposes. As Jessica explains.

I guess for us, for three weeks there was no online learning. First week was like “oh, we have to figure it out what to do”. Next [second] week was like “oh, we have spring break, so [parents] do not contact us [teachers]”. Third week, we’re asked a few times to figure it out what to do. And I find it unacceptable. (data extract).

There seems to have been an assumption on the part of teachers and/or schools that children, especially in this case young children, could learn through technology without much support from teachers or parents. Parents in this study wondered if any potential similar homeschooling situation could be improved by investigating how much teachers understand and are trained to utilize technology in their lesson planning without mainly relying on pre-made ‘one-size-fits-all’ online lessons, assignments, and assessment pieces available. KMacB argues that

in the early days, she [her daughter] really struggled with seeing a weekly math assignment that consisted of 20 pages in the Google Classroom + assignments in Netmath… it was overwhelming. She has ADHD, so that also contributed to her challenges and we had to work closely with her to chunk the work down into manageable amounts, but this is an ongoing challenge. (data extract).

The parents suggest that schools/teachers underestimated the need for parental support in managing technology during the ‘homeschooling’ process. There was a misunderstanding of students’ abilities to independently manage the weekly plan and self-teach themselves through technology. As DDM627 notes, the difficulties her Grade 1 daughter had in working on her own, even if the plan “was clear enough” to follow “[but] getting her to sit down and focus on it has been VERY challenging” (data extract).

The Inadequacy of Supporting Resources

The parents in this study also argue that perhaps associated with the noticeable scattered lesson plans, there was an overreliance on available pre-made online teaching resources that not always adequately addressed the differentiated needs of students and/or the specific curriculum focuses.

Nate suggests that perhaps teachers did not have adequate materials available, especially in French. She notes that.

It seems that there was a lack of resources for those teachers to be using to present to the children, to the students. So, I found that a kind of frustrating cause they would have videos in English and then the quizzes in French. Macy also agrees with Nate’s remarks and adds that. I was thinking that in French immersion this is not really acceptable [emotional sarcastic laugh] because they were doing pretty much the learning in English in our house. So that was a big challenge, and I agree with [that] the amount of help that grade two students need from parents is really big in this curriculum. (data extract).

Jessica adds that lack of access and/or the mechanical skills to manage technology were not a problem in her household. The challenge lays in how technology was apparently misunderstood and not utilized as much as it could have been by teachers/schools to convey contextualized learning. As Jessica explains.

there was no technical issue for us as we ah [pause] my husband is an IT specialist, so (ah) he set up everybody with everything and we were helping each other because we have two kids and the grade five is easier than the grade two. However, we do not speak French, so that the one hour per week interaction in French is completely inadequate. (data extract).

The Perceptions of the Experiences of Parents on the Importance of Social Interaction

Mental health.

Another concern the parents in this study had was the mental health of their children and the possible ramifications of the lockdown. This was discussed extensively in the Fontenelle-Tereshchuk ( 2020b ) article “Mental health and the COVID-19 crisis: The hopes and concerns for children as schools re-open” based on this same study.

Overall, Fontenelle-Tereshchuk ( 2020b ), the American Academy of Pediatrics ( 2020 ), and Sick Kids Foundation ( 2020 ) highlight the possible impact of the lack of social interaction among children during the lockdown on children’s mental and physical health. Fontenelle-Tereshchuk ( 2020b ) suggests that it is fundamentally important to address potential mental health challenges among Elementary school children when they return to school to help them to develop mechanisms to cope with the drastic rapid changes that affected lives during schools’ lockdown.

Discussions and Recommendations

The circumstances of this crisis were unprecedented in recent times. Education is striving to respond quickly and adequately to the sudden changes in patterns of teaching and learning, and parental support is a topic center-stage in this process. Research suggests that parental support is an important factor in students’ academic success (Amaral 2007 ; Chen and Harris 2009 ; Sedibe and Fourie 2018 ). However, parents who enroll their children in in-person programs in schools are usually not expected to be the main educational support provider.

In terms of the context of this study, even though parents could afford to provide their children with the technology they needed to support remote learning, there were other challenges. The pandemic affected the economy worldwide and many parents, particularly the parents in this study, had to deal with the uncertainty of the labor market that may have caused some of them to lose their jobs. Nine out of ten parents in this study had a minimum of a University degree and did not report the ability to manage technology or the accessibility to computers being an issue during this remote learning process. However, the majority of these parents were working full-time, while some were currently unemployed and/or perhaps concerned about how to get back into the uncertain job market.

The reality was that many parents felt that the main responsibility for their children’s continuing learning from home during this period was on their shoulders. Parents were ‘forced’ to juggle their own personal and professional struggles and needs with the needs of their children for continuity of receiving an education during this stressful crisis. The perceived experiences of these parents might point to gaps in research and teachers’ training on how young children learn through technology (Holloway et al. 2013 ), especially regarding independent learning. That is to say, the fact that many children can easily use the functions of electronic devices, and perhaps play video games and use social media for entertainment purposes, does not necessarily mean that they can use these devices independently for academic purposes.

One of the problems associated with remote learning during the lockdown was that the role of parents was not clearly defined and, the communication between schools and parents was deficient. Parents were ‘forced’ to take on a new and challenging role as ‘co’ teachers (World Bank Group 2020 ). Apparently, parental support was meant to be complementary to the online instruction and interactions between the schoolteachers and the students, but such parental-required support time was inconsistent as instructional remote learning offered to students was often ineffective and varied depending on schools, teachers, and/or school boards.

Parents also suggest that the ‘formal’ weekly home lesson plan was easy to follow, but vague and lacked an integrated and effective assessment piece. The parents in this study point to an apparent disconnection in the different parts that compose a ‘whole’ unit and lesson plans. They suggest that little attention was given to curriculum design as a harmonious and purposely catered teaching and learning plan suggested by research, which includes interconnected learning objectives, activities, and assessment aligned with the Alberta Program of Study (Alberta Education 2020c ; Borich 2007 ; Cicek and Tok 2014 ; Wiggins and McTighe 2005 ). Such curriculum design should respond to the students’ context and differentiated learning needs, which should be clearly reflected in the lesson plan, allowing teachers to make necessary adjustments in the course of implementation guided by integrated ongoing and purposely designed assessment (Borich 2007 ; Cicek and Tok 2014 ; Wiggins and McTighe 2005 ).

The issues related to curriculum design and implementation discussed in this study bring attention to two common problems in teacher education (Fontenelle-Tereshchuk 2019 ): (1) The often-suggested disconnection between theory and practice, or generally speaking, the disconnection between teacher education and the classroom reality of teachers. I agree with McDonough ( 2012 ) that “teacher educators require a theoretically and practically helpful model for situating their work” (p. 8); (2) Professional development initiatives that do not always succeed in addressing teachers’ specific reflective and skillset needs to support students’ learning (Broad and Evans 2006 ; Fontenelle-Tereshchuk 2019 ; Villegas-Reimers 2003 ).

The remote learning process due to this pandemic might have exacerbated the problem and have made the challenges of teachers teaching without the appropriate training and/or support to respond to the wide range of students’ needs more evident to parents. This phenomenon could be described as ‘bursting the bubble’ to rethink how we are supporting the professional growth of teachers. In the current educational scenario, a review of the effectiveness of curriculum design practices among classroom teachers should be addressed by professional development initiatives, teacher preparation programs, and further studies.

Another interesting challenge the parents highlighted about remote learning was that schools/teachers may have underestimated the support students needed to use technology for educational purposes. Parents remarked that most teachers did not fully utilize the technology available to provide enough and/or proper quality instructional time with students and that learning resources were scarce and often disengaging during this remote learning process.Although there is no intention of making a comparative examination of the remote learning effectiveness among the three school boards represented in this case study, there are some important observations to be made. The eight parents, whose children attend public schools, seemed to be very frustrated with the time dedicated to remote learning interactions between teachers and students as well as the utilization of this time to establish effective learning opportunities. For instance, Macy argues that her son had as low as 30 min of teacher-student interactional instruction every other week, and such interactions were student-group based which would provide her child with five to ten minutes of remote learning interaction with his teacher every two weeks. The other seven parents in the public system argue that their children had an average of an hour of student-group based teacher-student interaction instruction a week, which they felt was not enough to support learning remotely and may have had an impact on the mental health of children and parents due to the increase in the level of stress. Even though these parents also noticed a slight difference among teachers’ approaches and effectiveness, they felt that some teachers put more effort into interacting with students and providing extra materials, but that such materials were often not catered to address the students’ specific learning needs and the time interacting with students was not nearly enough.

In contrast, Anni, a parent in the Calgary Catholic School District, argued that her child was offered two hours daily of teacher–student interaction, and sometimes the teacher would record videos explaining the content and send them to students. It is important to notice that even though this parent seemed to suggest that her child’s teacher did her best teaching remotely, she adds that her child still required significant parental support in addition to the support offered by the school.

Carol, a parent in a Francophone school argues that her Kindergarten daughter had 3 h of remote learning daily which was good, but not always very engaging. She felt that her child did well and improved academically. However, such learning improvement could be circumstantial as the parent also indicates that in addition to the three hours of daily teacher and student instruction interaction provided by the school, this parent had teaching experience, spoke French, and spent money on extra-resources and extra instructional time working with her Kindergarten child.

The possible differences in school remote learning practices might indicate that Alberta Education, school boards, and schools failed to provide adequate support to teachers and parents with clear and consistent guidelines for the implementation of remote learning throughout the province. A review of the overall COVID-19 educational response plan to improve pedagogically, organizational, and implementational support to the school community should have a positive impact on future learning outcomes.

Overall, parents strongly agree that remote learning is not as effective as in-class learning for Elementary school children. After all, for the majority of parents, who worked full-time or were looking for employment as well as busy stay–at–home parents attending to household chores, some of them with children in different grades, it was difficult to provide the students with the extra parental support needed to use technology for educational purposes.

This study seems to also cast doubt on the popular excitement over the efficiency of online education on students’ autonomy and academic learning outcomes, especially commonly seen in social media posts. For instance, this post titled “The COVID-19 pandemic has changed education forever: This is how” might suggest online learning to be ‘the solution’ for the lockdown woes in education (Li and Lalani 2020 ). This study, however, points to the uncertainty of technology effectiveness use in online learning education, especially among young children (Holloway et al. 2013 ). The study indicates that technology can be utilized for teaching and learning purposes, but teachers are still essential to instrument learning in online environments, especially in Elementary school contexts. Such findings may contribute to expanding the narrative of remote learning and the effectiveness of online tools discourses beyond the assumption that ‘children might not learn because they do not have access to the technology needed, or perhaps the ‘mechanical training’.

In this study specifically, children had access to the required technology to learn in a remote learning format, yet parents still strongly suggested that remote learning is not ideal for young children. These parents suggest two main reasons why remote learning is not ideal for young children: Firstly, even in the best-case scenario when students have and can mechanically use the technology, they still need in-person support to stay focused and to answer ‘the often many’ questions about the content. And secondly, these young students strongly need hands-on experiences and interaction with their peers. The study also seems to indicate that older children in Grades 5–6 might be more susceptible to anxiety, most likely due to possible changes and the overall uncertainty of the near future, and social isolation.

Obviously, what is happening due to this global crisis could never be anticipated by previous research, but some questions could help us to reflect on the impact of this pandemic in education. Questions, such as ‘Are we being overly confident and reliant on the premises of the self-learning effectiveness of the use of technology for learning purposes?’, ‘Indeed, is perhaps more research needed to further understand how Elementary school children respond to remote learning and how effective it actually is?’, and ‘How can we rethink teacher education and reflect on what professional growth means to teachers?’.

This study recommends that independently of the different approaches to teaching and curriculum choices, the ability to design a lesson plan that is effective in attending to the differentiated needs of students is of key importance. A meaningful approach to curriculum design in its interconnected wholesomeness is essential to support the needs of teachers for professional growth in in-person and/or online teaching environments. Another recommendation is to think of schools as a community of human-diverse learners (Fontenelle-Tereshchuk 2020a ), improving the supportive learning relationships developed between school and community, especially parents. More attention has to be given to the importance of developing constructive relationships with parents to continue to support learning from home. These inclusive relationships are key to building a bridge between homes and schools. The last recommendation would come from research efforts to support education in finding a balance between including technology as a vehicle to communicate learning, well-utilized to support learning and understanding that technology does not replace the key instructional role of well-prepared teachers.

In conclusion, I would agree with Earl ( 2013 ) as she argues that “schools reflect the changes that are occurring more broadly in the society, and there seems to be no end to changes (economic, cultural and political) that schools are expected to keep up with and even lead” (p. 2). Recent changes due to this health, economic and social crisis ignited by the coronavirus pandemic in schools have been dramatic, and it might take time, research, and practical implementation to support the necessary adjustments to address the current complex educational challenges. Parents’ insights on remote learning might be key to reflect on the overall aspects that need to be improved in terms of teacher instructional growth support, school–parent relationships, and leadership policies to support learning whether in-person and/or online environments moving forward.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

There are no known conflicts of interest.

This study is unfunded and received the University of Calgary Ethics approval.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

• Alberta Education. (2013). Learning and technology policy framework 2013 . Edmonton, AB, Canada: Alberta. Retrieved from https://education.alberta.ca/media/1046/learning-and-technology-policy-framework-web.pdf
• Alberta Education (2020). Retrieved from https://www.alberta.ca/k-to-12-school-re-entry-2020-21-school-year.aspx
• Alberta Education (2020b). French Language Education in Alberta. Retrieved from https://www.alberta.ca/french-language-education-in-alberta.aspx#toc-0
• Alberta Education (2020c). Retrieved from https://www.alberta.ca/k-12-curriculum-programs-of-study.aspx
• Amaral, D. M. (2007). Parents’ perspectives: The role of parents in the education of children. Retrieved open.library.ubc.ca/ubc_2007-317280
• American Academy of Pediatrics (2020). Retrieved from https://services.aap.org/en/pages/2019-novel-coronavirus-covid-19-infections/clinical-guidance/covid-19-planning- considerations-return-to-in-person-education-in-schools/#.XwyRyIKm27M.email
• Beyerbach B, Walsh C, Vannatta R. From teaching technology to using technology to enhance student learning: Preservice teachers’ changing perceptions of technology infusion. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education. 2001; 9 (1):105–127. [ Google Scholar ]
• Borich GD. Effective teaching methods: Research-based practice. 6. Merrill Prentice-Hall, OH: Pearson; 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
• Briscoe, P., & Pollock, K. (2017). Principals’ understandings of student difference and/or student diversity. Canadian Association of Principals – CAP Journal , spring 2017. Retrieved from http://marketzone.ca/ebooks/CAP/2017/CAP-T0217_EMAG/html5forpc.html?page=0
• Broad, K., & Evans, M. (2006). A review of literature on professional development content and delivery modes for experienced teachers. Ontario Ministry of Education. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto. Retrieved from http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/ite/UserFiles/File/AReviewofLiteratureonPD.pdf
• Bruchac MM. Indigenous knowledge and traditional knowledge. In: Smith C, editor. Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology. New York, NY: Springer Science and Business Media; 2014. pp. 3814–3824. [ Google Scholar ]
• Calgary Board of Education - CBE (2020). Technology for Learning. Retrieved from https://cbe.ab.ca/programs/technology-for-learning/Pages/default.aspx
• Chen H, Harris P. Becoming school literate parents: An ESL perspective. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy. 2009; 32 (2):118–135. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cicek V, Tok H. Effective use of lesson plans to enhance education in U.S. and Turkish Kindergarten thru 12th Grade Public School System: A Comparative study. International Journal of Teaching and Education, Vol. II. 2014; 2 :10–20. [ Google Scholar ]
• Creswell JW. Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. 4. Boston, MA: Pearson; 2012. [ Google Scholar ]
• Earl LM. The promise and challenge of classroom assessment. In Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximize student learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Publisher; 2013. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fontenelle-Tereshchuk, D. (2019). Exploring teachers’ insights into their professional growth and other experiences in diverse classrooms in Alberta. Doctoral thesis . University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada. https://doi.org/10.7939/r3-j3kb-0y82
• Fontenelle-Tereshchuk D. Diversity in the classrooms: A human approach to schools. Interchange. 2020; 51 :429–439. doi: 10.1007/s10780-020-09402-4. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fontenelle-Tereshchuk D. Mental health and the COVID-19 crisis: The hopes and concerns for children as schools re-open. Interchange. 2020 doi: 10.1007/s10780-020-09413-1. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• George, M. J. (1999). Indigenous knowledge as a component of the school curriculum. In Semali, L. M., & Semali, L. M. What is indigenous knowledge?: Voices from the academy . Retrieved from https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca
• Gray C, Wilcox G, Nordstokke D. Teacher mental health, school climate, inclusive education, and student learning: A review. Canadian Psychological Association. 2017; 58 (3):203–210. doi: 10.1037/cap0000117. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Holloway, D., Green, L., & Livingstone, S. (2013). Zero to eight: Young children and their Internet use. London, England: EU Kids Online. Retrieved from http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/52630
• John DP. Lesson planning and the student-teacher: Re-thinking the dominant model. Journal of Curriculum Studies. 2006; 38 (4):483–498. doi: 10.1080/00220270500363620. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Joshi, P., Shukla, S. (2019). Children’s development in the digital age. In: Child development and education in the twenty-first century. Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9258-0_8
• Li, C. & Lalani, F. (2020). World Economic Forum. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/04/coronavirus-education-global-covid19-online-digital-learning/
• Martin K. Electronic overload: The impact of excessive screen use on child and adolescent health and wellbeing. Perth, WA: Department of Sport and Recreation; 2011. [ Google Scholar ]
• McCrimmon AW. Inclusive education in Canada: Issues in teacher preparation. Intervention in School and Clinic. 2015; 50 :234–237. doi: 10.1177/1053451214546402. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McDonough G. Teaching practitioners about theory and practice: A proposal to recover aristotle in teacher education. Journal of Thought. 2012; 47 (4):7–22. doi: 10.2307/jthought.47.4.7. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Oliver A, Justina OO, Walker MT. Using instructional technologies to enhance teaching and learning for the 21st century PreK-12 students: The case of a professional education programs unit. International Journal of Instructional Media. 2012; 39 (4):283–295. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rosen LD, Lim AF, Felt J, Carrier LM, Cheever NA, Lara-Ruiz JM, Mendoza JS, Rokkum J. Media and technology use predicts ill-being among children, preteens and teenagers independent of the negative health impacts of exercise and eating habits. Computers in Human Behavior. 2014; 35 :364–375. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.036. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sedibe M, Fourie J. Exploring Opportunities and challenges in parent-school partnerships in special needs schools in the Gauteng Province, South Africa. Interchange. 2018; 49 :433–444. doi: 10.1007/s10780-018-9334-5. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Semali, L. M. (1999). Community as classroom: (Re)valuing indigenous literacy. In Semali, L. M., & Semali, L. M. What is indigenous knowledge?: Voices from the academy. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca
• Sick Kids Foundation (2020). COVID-19: Recommendations for school reopening. Retrieved from http://www.sickkids.ca/PDFs/About-SickKids/81497-COVID19-Recommendations-for-School-Reopening-SickKids-JUNE.pdf
• Sokal, L., & Sharma, U. (2013). Canadian in-service teachers’ concerns, efficacy, and attitudes about inclusive teaching. Exceptionality Education International, 23 (1) , 59–71. Retrieved from https://ojs.lib.uwo.ca/index.php/eei/article/view/7704/6320
• Stackelberg, V. M. (2019). A logistical nightmare’: Teachers at 300 Canadian schools ordered to provide 7 years of lesson plans. Retrieved from https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/school-lesson-plans-1.5393384
• Statistics Canada (2018). Elementary–secondary education survey for Canada, the provinces and territories, 2016/2017. Retrieved from https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/181102/dq181102c-eng.htm
• Statistics Canada (2020). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Canadian families and children. Retrieved from https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/pub/11-627-m/11-627-m2020043-eng.pdf?st=P7OcpY3s
• Teuwen, J., De Groff, D., & Zaman, B. (2012). Flemish Preschoolers Online: A mixed-method approach to explore online use, preferences and the role of parents and siblings. Paper presented at the Etmaal van de Communicatiewetenschap, Leuven, Belgium. Retrieved from: https://lirias.kuleuven.be/bitstream/123456789/350708/1/Flemish+Preschoolers+Online_English+version.pdf
• U.S. Department of Education (2017). Office of educational technology, reimagining the role of technology in education: 2017 national education technology plan update, Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://tech.ed.gov
• Van Pelt, D. N. (2015). Home schooling in Canada: The current picture (2015 Ed.). Fraser Institute. Retrieved from https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/home-schooling-in-canada-2015-rev2.pdf
• Villegas-Reimers E. Teacher professional development: An international review of the literature. International Institute for Educational Planning Publisher: UNESCO; 2003. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yin RK. Case study research: Design and methods. 4. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wiggins M, McTighe J. Understanding by design. 2. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development; 2005. [ Google Scholar ]
• World Bank Group (2020). EdTech Knowledge pack on remote learning response to COVID-19. Retrieved from http://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/925611587160522864/KnoweldgePack-COVID19-RemoteLearning-LowResource-EdTech.pdf

The Rise of Homeschooling: The Confessions of an Educator

A personal perspective: why i chose to homeschool..

Posted April 18, 2024 | Reviewed by Michelle Quirk

• Why Education Is Important
• Find a Child Therapist

Education is the cornerstone of a great society. This belief propelled me to become an educator. Reflecting on my own grade school education and that of many of my students, I've been confronted with the shortcomings of our current system. Juggling a full-time career as a college professor and concerns about my children missing out on the social interactions associated with traditional schooling, I remained committed to finding solutions within the existing framework.

This commitment was short-lived, and I have now joined the millions who have turned to homeschooling to educate their children. According to the Washington Post , homeschooling is now the fastest-growing form of education among school-aged children in the U.S. While I continue to educate in the classroom, there are five main reasons why homeschooling became the right choice for my family:

1. Educational Inadequacy

As a professor, I noticed that most of my students are not prepared to manage the demands of a university-level education. Students often struggle to communicate ideas effectively, demonstrate critical thought, and respond to the scheduling demands of college. I noticed that homeschooled and international students were excelling more consistently. While I was intrigued, I was not convinced that this experience was widespread until I consulted the latest research.

Since teachers must undergo formal education and certification, I expected school-educated students to overall outperform home-educated students whose parents are not required to be similarly trained. Research by Ray (2024) reveals compelling evidence that homeschooled students have higher standardized test scores, are more likely to excel in college, demonstrate greater social skills, and achieve higher GPAs. The education crisis has been a constant topic of debate politically and socially, and without change, it seems many more parents will choose to educate their children at home.

2. Overexposure and Safety

In modern times, parents must take an active role in monitoring what children are exposed to. Concerns about safety, bullying , exposure to drug culture, and pressures toward early sexual debut push many parents to homeschooling. With these concerns in mind, we chose private school. I enjoyed the curriculum, but incidents of bullying, the increase in school shootings, and peer pressure made even that environment feel like a risk.

It was not until the COVID-19 pandemic that I felt forced to try homeschooling and I was shocked to find that I gained clarity about how to best educate my children. I now get to decide who and what my children are exposed to. This has allowed them to maintain their carefree worldview longer and for me to finally feel empowered.

3. Family Connection

One of the greatest goals of parenting should be to develop a lasting connection with our children. Homeschooling right from the beginning unexpectedly unveiled a profound transformation in our familial dynamic. My children became more responsive to my guidance in all areas. For the first time, I felt that we were able to do life together. The relentless grind of lengthy school days, early morning rushes, homework, sports commitments, and dinner preparations scarcely left room for meaningful interactions. Homeschooling has provided us with this unique opportunity to build a strong family connection.

4. Love of Learning

When there is a love for learning, life becomes more fulfilling and easier to manage. By the time many of my students make it to my classroom, they often present a disinterest in the learning experience altogether. Many are well-versed in partying and hanging out with friends but struggle to engage in their education enthusiastically. I wanted my children to keep their love for learning. Children often start out enjoying learning and demonstrate a seemingly natural desire to know more. In a traditional classroom, it becomes difficult to maintain the freedom and exploration that many students respond to due to pressure toward testing, overfilled classrooms, and constant disruptions. As homeschoolers, we can tailor education to the needs of our children and maintain the spontaneous and creative component that students enjoy. Learning becomes a part of life that is not limited to our home classroom.

5. Time Freedom

Schools are five days each week for six to eight hours a day. Homeschooling is not replicating institutional learning at home. With homeschooling, I found that my children were learning concepts faster and were more willing to engage with the material when they could help decide when subjects were addressed. I realized that the long days and many hours was not how children learn best. Colleges are set up totally differently, and I decided to adopt a college model: Instruction is only a few hours a day for only four days a week with Fridays off for tests and homework. My children now have more time to develop academically and athletically. My now-competitive gymnast does not have to miss school and feel behind when she has competitions during the day; my track runner can work on her training without being overly exhausted. I can invest more time in them overall as we are now on our own schedule, and it is very liberating.

Homeschooling Is Not for Everyone

One of the most important decisions a parent can make is how to educate their children. Everyone cannot and should not make the same decision; parents should be thoughtful and decisive in this important choice. Be engaged in your child’s education, know what the curriculum is, meet the teachers, listen to your child(ren), and get to know their friends. You do have power, and it should never be relinquished. You have more options than you think; make sure to explore them—the only cost is time.

Chris Weller. There’s a new path to Harvard and it’s not in a classroom . Business Insider. September 3, 2015.

Brian D. Ray. Research facts on homeschooling . National Home Education Research Institute. February 9, 2024.

How many kids are homeschooled in the U.S.? Growth by school district. Washington Post. 2023.

Calvina Ellerbe, Ph.D., is a college professor, TEDx speaker, and certified parenting coach who lives in North Carolina.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• International
• New Zealand
• South Africa
• Switzerland
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Therapy Center NEW
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Understanding what emotional intelligence looks like and the steps needed to improve it could light a path to a more emotionally adept world.

• Coronavirus Disease 2019
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

• Open access
• Published: 17 January 2022

Psychosocial impacts of home-schooling on parents and caregivers during the COVID-19 pandemic

• Alison L. Calear 1 ,
• Sonia McCallum 1 ,
• Alyssa R. Morse 1 ,
• Michelle Banfield 1 ,
• Amelia Gulliver 1 ,
• Nicolas Cherbuin 2 ,
• Louise M. Farrer 1 ,
• Kristen Murray 3 ,
• Rachael M. Rodney Harris 4 , 5 &
• Philip J. Batterham 1  

BMC Public Health volume  22 , Article number:  119 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

25k Accesses

28 Citations

28 Altmetric

Metrics details

The COVID-19 pandemic has been highly disruptive, with the closure of schools causing sudden shifts for students, educators and parents/caregivers to remote learning from home (home-schooling). Limited research has focused on home-schooling during the COVID-19 pandemic, with most research to date being descriptive in nature. The aim of the current study was to comprehensively quantify the psychosocial impacts of home-schooling on parents and other caregivers, and identify factors associated with better outcomes.

A nationally representative sample of 1,296 Australian adults was recruited at the beginning of Australian COVID-19 restrictions in late-March 2020, and followed up every two weeks. Data for the current study were drawn from waves two and three. Surveys assessed psychosocial outcomes of psychological distress, work and social impairment, and wellbeing, as well as a range of home-schooling factors.

Parents and caregivers who were home-schooling during the COVID-19 pandemic experienced significantly higher levels of psychological distress and work/social impairment compared to those who were not home-schooling or had no school-aged children. A current mental health diagnosis or lower levels of perceived support from their child’s school negatively affected levels of psychological distress, work and social impairment, and wellbeing in parents and caregivers involved in home-schooling.

Conclusions

The mental health impacts of home-schooling were high and may rise as periods of home-schooling increase in frequency and duration. Recognising and acknowledging the challenges of home-schooling is important, and should be included in psychosocial assessments of wellbeing during periods of school closure. Emotional and instrumental support is needed for those involved in home-schooling, as perceived levels of support is associated with improved outcomes. Proactive planning by schools to support parents may promote better outcomes and improved home-schooling experiences for students.

Peer Review reports

By the end of March 2020, many countries had implemented strict physical distancing policies, including large-scale or national closure of schools, to reduce the transmission of COVID-19 [ 1 ]. According to the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), by the beginning of April 2020 an estimated 172 countries had instituted nation-wide school closures affecting over 1.4 billion learners [ 2 ]. In response, educators had to adapt curriculum and implement new modes of delivery to enable students to participate in remote learning from home (hereafter termed home-schooling), while parents and other caregivers had to manage the supervision of home-schooling alongside their other professional, personal, and parenting roles [ 3 , 4 ]. In Australia, schools closed nationally to the majority of students at the end of March 2020, with select schools remaining open for vulnerable children, based on young age, social disadvantage, or specific needs [ 5 ], and those whose parents or caregivers were healthcare or other essential frontline workers.

For many parents and caregivers, home-schooling has placed considerable demands on time. It has often required them to balance multiple competing and unfamiliar roles without the usual support of grandparents, or other extended family, friends or teachers [ 3 , 6 ]. The challenges of home-schooling may be exacerbated by pressure to continue to work from home to keep jobs and businesses running [ 6 ]. As a result, some parents and caregivers have had to work longer hours each day to meet work and home-schooling obligations, potentially affecting sleep and reducing time for leisure activities [ 3 , 7 ].

The availability of resources for schools and families, such as electronic devices and adequate internet service, has also likely impacted home-schooling experiences. Carers of younger school-aged children or those with additional needs may have been particularly affected, as these children typically require closer supervision to complete home-schooling activities. A study in Hong Kong that surveyed parents about their experiences of home-schooling reported that only 14% of primary school students could complete activities without assistance [ 4 ].

School closures have been a highly disruptive element of the COVID-19 pandemic, altering the day-to-day lives of children and families. The sudden shift to home-schooling and the challenges it has presented based on factors such as the age and ability of their child(ren), parental income, living conditions (crowded housing or homelessness), and available additional support has placed added pressure on parents and caregivers [ 3 , 8 ]. In addition, the impact of home-schooling has not been evenly distributed, with caregivers of children with disabilities and diverse educational needs facing higher rates of stress and mental health problems [ 7 , 9 ]. In turn, increased parental stress may have negatively affected their mental health, the parent-child relationship, and the emotional wellbeing of the child [ 3 , 4 ]. These factors may have also impacted educational attainment [ 5 ].

Given the ongoing COVID-19 lockdowns internationally, and the potential for future pandemics and other system shocks (e.g., fires, floods, earthquakes), there is a clear need to comprehensively quantify the psychosocial impacts of home-schooling on parents and other caregivers, and to investigate individual and environmental characteristics that exacerbate them. Therefore, the current study aimed to (1) assess the impact of home-schooling on parent/caregiver psychological distress, work and social impairment, and wellbeing; and (2) identify factors associated with psychological distress, work and social impairment, and wellbeing among those engaged in home-schooling.

Participants and procedure

The Australian National COVID-19 Mental Health, Behaviour and Risk Communication (COVID-MHBRC) survey was established to longitudinally assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on a representative sample of Australian adults aged 18 years and over [ 10 ]. The study consisted of seven waves of data collection, which were completed online on a fortnightly basis and administered through Qualtrics Research Services. Participants were emailed an invitation to complete each survey and were provided a one-week window in which to complete it. Participants received up to five reminders to complete a survey during the week of data collection. Quota sampling was used to obtain a sample of the Australian population from market research panels that was representative on the bases of age group, gender and State/Territory of residence. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to participation in the study. The current study was approved by The Australian National University Human Research Ethics Committee (protocol 2020/152) and the full study protocol is available online ( https://psychology.anu.edu.au/files/COVID_MHBRCS_protocol.pdf ).

The first wave of data collection commenced on the 28th March 2020 ( N =1296). Besides demographics and background variables (collected in Wave 1), data for the current study were drawn from waves two (home-schooling variables) and three (mental health outcomes) collected between the 11th and 30th April 2020. Over 73% of the initial sample was retained at Wave 2 (W2; N =969). Attrition across subsequent waves was lower, consistently retaining over 90% wave-on-wave ( N W3=952, W4=910, W5=874; W6=820; W7=762).

Psychological Distress

The five-item Distress Questionnaire-5 (DQ5; [ 11 ]) was measured at wave 3 and used to assess psychological distress over the past two weeks. Items were rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (Never) to 5 (Always). Total scale scores ranged from 5 to 25, with higher scores indicating greater psychological distress. The scale had very good internal consistency in the current study sample (α = 0.93).

Work and social impairment

The extent to which work and social activities were impaired by COVID-19 was measured at wave 3 using the Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS; [ 12 ]). Participants were asked to rate the level of impairment COVID-19 had caused for five work and social domains (ability to work, home management, social leisure activities, private leisure activities, and ability to form and maintain close relationships) on a 9-point scale ranging from 0 (Not at all impaired) to 8 (Very severely impaired). Total scores on this scale ranged from 0 to 40, with higher scores indicative of greater work and social impairment as a result of COVID-19. The WSAS had very good internal consistency in the current study sample (α = 0.77).

Subjective wellbeing during the past two weeks was assessed at wave 3 using the 5-item World Health Organization Wellbeing Index (WHO-5; [ 13 ]). Items were responded to on a 6-point scale ranging from 0 (At no time) to 5 (All of the time), multiplied by four to obtain total scale scores ranging between 0 and 100. Higher scores are indicative of greater wellbeing. The scale had very good internal consistency (α = 0.93).

Home-schooling factors

A range of factors associated with home-schooling were also assessed at wave 2 among respondents who reported home-schooling their children due to COVID-19. Respondents to these items could include parents, grandparents, or other caregivers, and included items on the school level of children (primary school/ secondary school), working from home (yes/no), sharing of home-schooling duties (yes/no), and perceived impact on work/daily activity (4-point scale from ‘not at all’ to ‘a lot’). The amount of support received from the school was also collated (e.g., online social interactions with teachers and/or peers; real-time lessons; pre-recorded teacher instruction videos; structured activities; list of optional activities; connected with other parents), with total scores on this item ranging from 0 to 6. The perceived support received from the school was assessed based on perceptions of school flexibility (e.g., advice from the school to do what best suits each family), how the school facilitated connection to peers, whether the school helped families to enjoy home-schooling, or whether the school caused parents to feel stress or worry about home-schooling. These four items were assessed on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (Not at all) to 4 (Extremely) and could range from 0 to 16 with higher scores indicating greater perceived support.

Demographic and background variables

At wave 1 participants also provided details on their age, gender, and level of educational attainment (Secondary school, certificate/diploma, Bachelor’s degree, higher degree [e.g., PhD]). Participants were also asked if they had ever been diagnosed (past/current) by a clinician (e.g., general practitioner, psychologist, psychiatrist) with anxiety, depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, post-traumatic stress disorder, autism spectrum disorder, alcohol or substance use disorder, eating disorder, or other mental disorder (specify). For the purposes of the current study, these items were combined into a single variable assessing mental health diagnosis history (none/past/current).

Statistical analysis

Between-subject ANOVAs were conducted to compare participants who were home-schooling, with those who had children but were not home-schooling them (‘not home-schooling’) and those who did not have school-aged children, on the key psychosocial outcomes of (i) psychological distress, (ii) work and social impairment, and (iii) wellbeing. A series of linear regression analyses were conducted to identify if demographic, background and home-schooling variables collected at wave 2 were associated with higher levels of psychological distress and work and social impairment, and lower levels of wellbeing measured at wave 3.

Impact on psychosocial outcomes

Table  1 presents participant characteristics according to home-schooling status. For demographic factors, participants who reported home-schooling their children were significantly younger and more likely to have a Bachelor’s degree than participants without school-aged children or those not home-schooling their children. There were no significant differences between the three groups in terms of gender or mental health diagnosis.

The impact of home-schooling on psychological distress, work/social impairment and wellbeing at wave 3 is also presented in Table  1 . On average, home-schooling participants scored 1.6 points higher (Cohen’s d = 0.32) on the DQ5 measure of psychological distress, F (2,872)=7.19, p = 0.001, and 3.5 points higher ( d = 0.38) on the WSAS measure of work/social impairment, F (2,869)=9.90, p <0.001, compared to participants who were not home-schooling. No differences were observed in levels of wellbeing between groups, F (2,873)=0.35, p = 0.704.

Factors associated with psychosocial outcomes among participants who home-schooled

Table  2 presents a summary of the home-schooling variables. The majority of home-schooling participants reported having at least one primary-school aged child (65.4%), while just over half reported working from home while home-schooling (53.8%) and/or sharing the home-schooling duties with another adult (51%). A little under half of home-schooling participants perceived home-schooling to have had some or much impact on their work or daily activities. On average, participants received two home-schooling supports from their school (e.g., structured activities).

Table  3 presents the results of the linear regression analyses. Higher levels of psychological distress were significantly associated with a current mental health diagnosis, lower levels of educational attainment, greater perceptions that home-schooling was having an impact on work and daily activities, and lower levels of perceived support from their child’s school. Higher levels of work and social impairment were significantly associated with a current mental health diagnosis, male gender, younger age, and lower levels of perceived support from their child’s school. Lastly, lower levels of wellbeing were significantly associated with past and current mental health diagnosis, and lower levels of perceived support from their child’s school.

To our knowledge, the current study is the first to comprehensively assess and quantify the psychosocial effects of home-schooling on parents and other caregivers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Overall, this study found that parents and caregivers who were home-schooling during the COVID-19 pandemic experienced higher levels of psychological distress and work/social impairment than those who were not home-schooling or had no school-aged children. Among those home-schooling, younger people with less education and a history of mental health problems had higher psychological distress and lower wellbeing. Work/social impairment was additionally associated with being male. Those who perceived home-schooling to have a higher impact on work and daily activities, and those who believed they had lower levels of support from the school, also experienced greater distress and work/social impairments. This key finding highlights the importance of communication between schools and parents in the context of home-schooling during the COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, the need to acknowledge and support the diverse challenges faced when home-schooling, such as enabling flexibility in expectations and activities.

The findings are consistent with qualitative research suggesting that home-schooling puts enormous time demands and pressure on people who are required to fulfil multiple, and sometimes conflicting, roles [ 3 , 4 ]. For many parents and caregivers, the time needed to undertake home-schooling duties has adversely impacted their ability to work, or led to a reduction or reallocation of work hours, which may have also reduced their ability to engage in home management and leisure activities [ 3 , 7 ]. The distress, lowered wellbeing, and lack of support felt by parents during this time has likely been amplified by financial concerns, worries about the health risks of COVID-19, and the inability to draw on usual social networks for support, such as grandparents, friends and other family members, due to strict physical distancing restrictions during the pandemic [ 3 , 6 ]. The available “down-time” during this period may have been significantly reduced for many parents and caregivers and this is reflected in increased psychological distress, and work and social impairment.

The current study also found that the levels of psychological distress, work and social impairment, and wellbeing experienced by participants who were home-schooling during the pandemic was negatively affected by a current or past mental health diagnosis. People experiencing mental health difficulties may already have a reduced capacity to cope with stress and uncertainty [ 14 , 15 ]. As the COVID-19 pandemic progresses, and in future major crises, this points to a need to identify people who are highly likely to struggle with the additional responsibilities of home-schooling and ensure tailored support is available to minimise distress and maximise educational outcomes for children.

The importance of support is reinforced by the finding that perceived support from the child’s school was consistently related to all three psychosocial outcomes. Participants who reported higher perceived support from their child’s school tended to report lower levels of distress and impairment, and higher levels of wellbeing. This finding is in line with the wider mental health literature that associates social support with better mental health outcomes [ 16 ]. Specifically, it points to the importance of providing all schools with the capacity to deliver the required practical and social support, and appropriate resources to parents and caregivers, during enforced periods of home-schooling, with attention paid to factors that may increase vulnerability to distress. Support may include simple recognition of the challenges faced by non-teachers in education delivery, and reassurance that parents’ and caregivers’ efforts to support their children’s learning are “enough.” Further, cooperation and flexibility from workplaces to ensure parents and caregivers, especially those with a history of mental health problems and/or with young children requiring significant learning support, is also likely to reduce distress and perceived impairments.

Higher psychological distress was also associated with lower levels of educational attainment and higher perceived impact of home-schooling on work and daily activities. Parents and caregivers with lower levels of education may have been less confident in their ability to support learning or found it more challenging due to lower literacy or numeracy skills [ 17 ]. Higher perceptions of the negative impacts of home-schooling may have led to feelings of being overwhelmed or reduced feelings of control. This risks further entrenching the social disadvantage already prevalent in those with lower levels of education. Higher levels of work and social impairment were also observed in males and younger participants. Males may have been less accustomed to flexible work arrangements [ 18 ], as women are often the primary carers of children, or their positions may have been less amenable to home-schooling disruptions and thus they perceived greater impairments to their work and social functioning. Younger parents and caregivers may have been more likely to have younger children, and thus the time requirement and pressure on them to actively participate in remote home learning activities may have been greater and potentially more disruptive.

Recognising and acknowledging the challenges of home-schooling is important, and should be included in psychosocial assessments of wellbeing during periods of school closure. There is a clear need to provide emotional and instrumental support to parents and other caregivers during school closures so that they can manage all roles effectively, and minimise adverse psychosocial effects. Parents and caregivers need access to support from social networks if available [ 16 ], and need schools to communicate realistic expectations, provide adequate educational activities, and supportive feedback that accounts for the unequal spread of perceived impact. Similarly, as teachers are the primary point of contact for students during remote learning, they need to be adequately supported during this time so that they can be available to effectively support students and parents. Whilst the unexpected school closures as a result of COVID-19 necessitated a rapid response to educational support materials that may have been less than ideal in some cases, as the pandemic progresses, it is critical to record and act upon lessons learned about activities that facilitate supported and independent learning for children, and provide greater support for parents and caregivers who are not educators and trying to balance work responsibilities. This is particularly the case for parents and caregivers who may face additional struggles, including those with mental health issues or with lower levels of education, that may undermine confidence or ability to home-school [ 4 ] and perpetuate social disadvantage.

The current study has several strengths. Firstly, the data were collected at the peak of home-schooling in Australia in a generally representative population sample. Secondly, data were collected over multiple time points, reinforcing the temporal effects of the findings. However, the study also has some limitations. Although the study was designed to be representative of the Australian population, it is likely that under-privileged groups - those with low income, educational attainment, and employment - were not adequately represented and may have been even more affected by home-schooling [ 19 ]. We also did not separately consider the impacts of home-schooling on families with multiple children or on those who had children with a disability or diverse educational needs. Time-poor parents may be less inclined to participate in research panels, so the findings may provide a conservative estimate of the impacts of home-schooling on busy parents.

In summary, parents and caregivers engaged in home-schooling during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic reported higher levels of psychological distress and work and social impairment than their non-home-schooling peers – both those without school-aged children and those with children still in school. People who were younger, male, had a history of mental health difficulties and/or perceived the impacts of home-schooling on work and daily activities to be higher, or the support of schools to be lower, were particularly affected. Understanding the impacts of home-schooling on parents and caregivers is critical, as periods of home-schooling are likely to continue into the future. In addition, the functioning of parents and caregivers can impact upon the parent-child relationship, child wellbeing and potentially the academic outcomes of children during periods of lock-down.

Availability of data and materials

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Viner RM, Russell SJ, Croker H, Packer J, Ward J, Stansfield C, et al. School closure and management practices during coronavirus outbreaks including COVID-19: a rapid systematic review. Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2020;4:397–404.

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization. COVID-19 educational disruption and response 2020 [Available from: https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse .

Griffith AK. Parental burnout and child maltreatment during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Fam Violence. 2020:1–7.

Lau EYH, Lee K. Parents’ views on young children’s distance learning and screen time during COVID-19 class suspension in Hong Kong. Early Education and Development. 2020.

Brown N, Te Riele K, Shelley B, Woodroffe J. Learning at home during COVID-19: Effects on vulnerable young Australians. Hobart: Peter Underwood Centre for Educational Attainment, University of Tasmania; 2020.

Google Scholar  

Fegert JM, Vitiello B, Plener PL, Clemens V. Challenges and burden of the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic for child and adolescent mental health: a narrative review to highlight clinical and research needs in the acute phase and the long return to normality. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health. 2020;14:20.

Article   Google Scholar  

Evans S, Mikocka-Walus A, Klas A, Olive L, Sciberras E, Karantzas G, et al. From “It has stopped our lives” to “Spending more time together has strengthened bonds”: The varied experiences of Australian families during COVID-19. Front Psychol. 2020;11:588667.

Cluver L, Lachman JM, Sherr L, Wessels I, Krug E, Rakotomalala S, et al. Parenting in a time of COVID-19. Lancet. 2020;395:e64.

Chafouleas SM, Iovino EA. Initial impact of COVID-19 on the well-being of caregivers of children with and without disabilities. Storrs, CT: UConn Collaboratory on School and Child Health; 2020.

Dawel A, Shou Y, Smithson M, Cherbuin N, Banfield M, Calear AL, et al. The effect of COVID-19 on mental health and wellbeing in a representative sample of Australian adults. Front Psychiatry. 2020;11:579985.

Batterham PJ, Sunderland M, Carragher N, Calear AL, Mackinnon AJ, Slade T. The Distress Questionnaire-5: Population screener for psychological distress was more accurate than the K6/K10. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;71:35–42.

Mundt JC, Marks IM, Shear MK, Greist JH. The Work and Social Adjustment Scale: a simple measure of impairment in functioning. Br J Psychiatry. 2002;180:461–4.

Topp CW, Ostergaard SD, Sondergaard S, Bech P. The WHO-5 Well-Being Index: a systematic review of the literature. Psychother Psychosom. 2015;84:167–76.

Boelen PA, Lenferink LIM. Latent class analysis of indicators of intolerance of uncertainty. Scand J Psychol. 2018;59:243–51.

Yook K, Kim KH, Suh SY, Lee KS. Intolerance of uncertainty, worry, and rumination in major depressive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder. J Anxiety Disord. 2010;24:623–8.

Gariépy G, Honkaniemi H, Quesnel-Vallée A. Social support and protection from depression: Systematic review of current findings in Western countries. Br J Psychiatry. 2016;209:284–293.

Lamb S. Impact of learning from home on educational outcomes for disadvantaged children: Brief assessment. Victoria: Centre for International Research on Education Systems; 2020.

Ewald A, Gilbert E, Huppatz K. Fathering and flexible working arrangements: A systematic interdisciplinary review. J Fam Theory Rev. 2020;12:27–40.

Thomas J, Barraket J, Wilson C, Ewing S, MacDonald T, Tucker J, et al. Measuring Australia’s digital divide: The Australian digital inclusion index Melbourne: RMIT University; 2017.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge the other team members of The Australian National COVID-19 Mental Health, Behaviour and Risk Communication survey who also contributed to the design and management of the study.

This project was supported by funding from the College of Health and Medicine at the Australian National University. ALC is supported by National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) fellowships 1173146. LMF is supported by Australian Research Council DECRA DE190101382. PJB is supported by NHMRC Fellowship 1158707. The funding body did not have a role in the study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of the data; in the writing of the paper; or in the decision to submit the paper for publication.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Centre for Mental Health Research, Research School of Population Health, The Australian National University, 63 Eggleston Road, ACT 2601, Acton, Australia

Alison L. Calear, Sonia McCallum, Alyssa R. Morse, Michelle Banfield, Amelia Gulliver, Louise M. Farrer & Philip J. Batterham

Centre for Research on Ageing, Health and Wellbeing, Research School of Population Health, The Australian National University, Acton, Australia

Nicolas Cherbuin

Research School of Psychology, The Australian National University, Acton, Australia

Kristen Murray

National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Research School of Population Health, The Australian National University, Acton, Australia

Rachael M. Rodney Harris

Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Acton, Australia

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

ALC, SM, ARM, and PJB were involved in formulating the research question, and designing the study. PJB analysed the data. All authors were involved in the design and conduct of the survey. ALC drafted the article, and all authors contributed to the writing and critical editing of the article. All authors approved the final version for submission.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alison L. Calear .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

The ethical aspects of this study were approved by The Australian National University Human Research Ethics Committee (protocol 2020/152) and conforms to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Calear, A.L., McCallum, S., Morse, A.R. et al. Psychosocial impacts of home-schooling on parents and caregivers during the COVID-19 pandemic. BMC Public Health 22 , 119 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-12532-2

Download citation

Received : 12 October 2021

Accepted : 06 January 2022

Published : 17 January 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-12532-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Psychological distress
• Home-schooling

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

The Post examined home schooling’s surge in the U.S. Here’s what we found.

In March 2020, an involuntary form of home schooling — remote learning — was thrust upon American families everywhere. Millions could not wait to get their kids back to school, but for hundreds of thousands of others, the idea of teaching their kids at home was appealing. A surge in home schooling became one of the lasting impacts of the pandemic.

Yet there has been scant reliable data on the magnitude of the growth or the nature of the new home-schoolers. As part of a year-long series, The Washington Post set out to understand who the new home-schoolers are, where they live, how many there are and why they made these choices.

This research has included more than 100 interviews and two groundbreaking data projects: the collection and analysis of six years of enrollment and home-schooling registration figures in nearly 7,000 school districts, and a national poll of home-school parents .

The results paint a picture of home schooling as the fastest growing part of the U.S. education system, embraced by families more diverse than ever before, who are engaged in new and different ways of home education from the home-schoolers who preceded them.

1. Even as the pandemic eased, home schooling persisted

In the first year of the pandemic, home schooling surged. Although small declines followed in the next two years, the number of children in home schooling remained 45 percent higher in the 2022-23 academic year than it was in 2017-18, based on data collected by the Post.

In 18 states, The Post was able to compare the growth of home schooling to enrollment in public and private schools over six years. In those states, the number of home-school students rose 51 percent between 2017-18 and 2022-23 — far exceeding a 7 percent rise in private school enrollment and a 4 percent decline in public school enrollment. That makes home schooling the fastest growing form of education, by a lot.

Patterns differed across the country. In a few states — Florida, Louisiana, South Carolina and South Dakota — home schooling rose during the first pandemic year and kept climbing after that. But in two states — Georgia and Maryland — the total has returned to pre-pandemic levels. Other states saw the number of home-schoolers fall after a big spike but remain well above pre-pandemic populations.

2. Home schooling comes off the fringe

Home-schooling was once a fringe practice rarely discussed in mainstream education circles. That’s no longer the case.

Data was not available from every state, so The Post’s figures cannot be used for a precise national count. Nevertheless, by applying the rate of growth seen in The Post’s analysis to pre-pandemic federal data, our data reporters estimate there are now between 1.9 million and 2.7 million home-schooled children in the United States, exceeding the 1.7 million in Catholic schools but less than the 3.7 million in charter schools in 2021-22.

The Post found 390 districts where there was at least one home-schooled child for every 10 enrolled in the public schools in the 2021-22 academic year. The number of districts with rates that high has nearly quadrupled since the 2017-18 academic year.

3. Where is home schooling on the rise? All sorts of places.

The places where home schooling has spiked are remarkably diverse, with all sorts of communities seeing rising numbers. The Post collected data from 32 states and the District of Columbia, and talked with families in rural Kentucky, suburban Florida and southern California — all of which saw remarkable growth. In 24 of New York City’s 33 school districts, the number of home-schooled children at least tripled over six years.

Wealthy school districts and those with high test scores (two highly overlapping groups) saw the biggest increases in home schooling during the 2020-21 school year. But in the next two years, these spikes came down, and top-scoring districts looked much more like others.

In contrast, low-performing districts were no more likely to see increases in home schooling in any year since the pandemic, belying the theory that parents are rejecting low-quality public schools.

4. Religion recedes as a home-school driver

For decades, home schooling was dominated by Christian conservatives looking to incorporate religion into their children’s education. There are still lots of religious home-schoolers, but they no longer dominate the group as they once did.

In a 2012 federal survey, nearly 2 in 3 home-school parents listed a desire to provide religious instruction as a reason for home schooling. That dropped to about half of parents in 2016 and a small majority in 2019 federal surveys . By this summer, the share had fallen to 34 percent, a Washington Post-Schar School poll found.

Parents who began home schooling after the onset of the pandemic cite a wide range of different motivations, including fear of school shootings , anxiety over bullying and anger with the perceived encroachment of politics into public schools, according to the Post-Schar School poll.

The survey, and interviews with many families , also point to concerns over how schools serve children with special needs. About 1 in 3 home-school parents said this concern prompted them to home school, and nearly 3 in 10 home-school parents say their child has attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, about twice the rate of parents who do not home school.

5. Home-schoolers are more diverse than ever

It’s not just that there are more home-schoolers — they are now a far more diverse group.

Home-schoolers, as a whole, are more conservative than the general public — but not as much as they once were. Among families who began home schooling before the onset of the pandemic, Republicans outnumbered Democrats 3 to 1. But those who began since 2020 are about evenly divided between the two parties.

Nearly half of all parents said they are motivated to home school by overly liberal school policies, while about a quarter cite conservative viewpoints. But the group that began home schooling since the pandemic is more closely divided between those two views.

The survey also found that today’s home-schoolers are more racially diverse, with the White share of the total falling from about three-quarters in 2019 to just under half. The rise was driven in part by increases among Hispanic families. The Post’s data analysis also found a notable expansion of home schooling in districts with substantial Hispanic populations. For instance, home schooling in Miami-Dade County Public Schools — where 73 percent of students are Hispanic — nearly doubled. That said, there was no way to know how many home-schoolers in these districts are Hispanic.

6. Parents do less and less of the teaching

The very nature of home schooling looks different today.

New resources are available to home-schooling families, including online programs such as Outschool and Duolingo that allow students to study independently. Online classes are now used by nearly 60 percent of home-school families, the Post-Schar School poll found.

Home-schoolers today also find a large menu of in-person programs have popped up in communities all over the country — the poll finds about 1 in 10 home-school families using microschools or learning pods , for instance. Other options include hybrid schools, where students spend part of the week at school and part at home, and charter schools, where teachers offer some support but students learn from their parents at home.

The Post-Schar School poll, conducted this summer, also found that about half of home-school parents saying their children would receive at least some instruction from a teacher or tutor this year, much higher than the 22 percent who said the same in 2019.

Clara Ence Morse, Prayag Gordy, Scott Clement and Emily Guskin contributed to this report.

latest in US News

Doctor who drove Tesla off cliff with family inside had...

Biden tries to downplay age with jokes, mocks Trump at White...

Hero grandma shoots burglar who interrupted Taylor Swift movie...

Pennsylvania state bills middle-class man $34B in baffling income...

Environmentalist smashes world record by hugging 1,123 trees in...

Beloved New York Post photographer dead at 78

Anti-Israel protesters crash WH Correspondents Dinner red carpet,...

Michigan teen warned best friend to slow down before fatal...

Yale professor accuses columbia prez shafik of plagiarism, ‘intellectual theft’ in resurfaced 1994 research paper.

• View Author Archive
• Get author RSS feed
• Email the Author
• Follow on Twitter

Contact The Author

Thanks for contacting us. We've received your submission.

Thanks for contacting us. We've received your submission.

Embattled Columbia University president Nemat “Minouche” Shafik screwed a former underling out of credit on a research paper published 30 years ago, a Yale University professor claims.

Ahmed Mushfiq Mobarak posted the bombshell allegations in a blistering thread on X early Friday, juxtaposing images of a 1992 report Shafik co-authored for World Bank with researcher Sushenjit Bandyopadhyay, along with a journal published in Oxford Economic Papers two years later in which Bandyopadhyay’s name was removed.

Mobarak, an economics and management professor at Yale, told The Post the findings and research cited in both papers are pretty much equal.

“It got rewritten, but fundamentally it’s the same paper,” he alleged.

“We can’t get in the room and [learn] what sentences did he write and what sentences she wrote, but what we do know is his contribution was sufficient to warrant co-authorship [in 1992],” he added. “What is not common is for someone to be a co-author and then suddenly their name is taken off.”

Instead, Bandyopadhyay is only “thanked” in an acknowledgement section in the back of the 1994 published journal — which screams of “power asymmetry” considering Shafik was then Bandyopadhyay’s boss, alleged Mobarak.

Bandyopadhyay declined comment when asked whether he felt slighted.

However, Mobarak, also a former World Bank consultant and University of Maryland graduate, said he spoke to Bandyopadhyay about the issue and that Bandyopadhyay believes he should have been credited as a co-author in the second paper. The professor conceded Bandyopadhyay never said anything “negative” about the Columbia president.

“This [1994] paper is lifted almost entirely from a 1992 report coauthored with consultant not credited in the publication,” wrote Mobarak on X. “This is wholesale intellectual theft, not subtle plagiarism.”

At the time both papers were written, Shafik was a vice president for World Bank and Bandyopadhyay, a consultant who also attended the University of Maryland.

Mobarak’s allegations echo plagiarism accusations leveled against former Harvard University president Claudine Gay, who eventually resigned in disgrace in January .

Columbia University spokesperson Ben Chang shot down the Yale professor’s claims, saying “this is an absurd attempt at running a well-known playbook, and it has no credibility.”

Share this article:

Advertisement

VP: 75% of school shootings resulted from gun that wasn’t secured | Fact check

• Samantha Putterman PolitiFact reporter

At an event touting the Biden administration’s efforts to curb gun violence, Vice President Kamala Harris said the vast majority of guns used in school shootings come from unsecured locations in homes.

On April 15 in Las Vegas, Harris said gun owners have a responsibility to secure firearms so children and young people can’t access them.

“Put it in a lockbox, because especially if a young person is just curious, or, you know, wants to play with a gun … let’s not make it too easy to get,” Harris said. “And that’s what secure storage is about. You know, the numbers that I have seen suggest that as many as 75% of school shootings resulted from a gun that was not secured.”

Harris’ comments come after parents Jennifer and James Crumbley were sentenced to 10 years in prison for a deadly mass shooting their son committed in 2021 at his Michigan high school.

We took a closer look at the statistic and found the study Harris cites concluded that some school shooters acquired firearms that were considered unsecured or easily accessible in family homes — but not 75%.

This is not the first time this figure has been cited.

The White House pointed PolitiFact to a 2019 U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center report on targeted school violence — planned incidents perpetrated by current or former students using weapons obtained for the specific purpose of causing others harm at school.

The study evaluated 41 incidents, 25 involving firearms. Nineteen of the shooters, or 76%, got their guns from homes. Twelve, or 48%, of the shooters obtained their weapons from what researchers considered to be “accessible” or “not secured in a meaningful way.”

“You get to the 75% or 76% number by adding the firearms from homes where the guns had been locked up,” said Daniel Webster, a distinguished research scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions.

Criminologists and youth gun violence experts told PolitiFact data on gun storage and its relationship to U.S. school shootings is scant. The best available figures show that many school shootings by younger perpetrators are carried out with firearms that were considered unsecured or accessible in the home.

“It makes sense that most of the guns used in school shootings come from the shooter’s home. It’s the easiest place for a juvenile to find a gun,” said Jay Corzine, an emeritus sociology professor and a gun policy specialist at the University of Central Florida. “But, is it 75%? Is it 68%? I don’t know.”

The Secret Service study and its limitations

The U.S. Secret Service report studied 41 incidents of “targeted school violence” that occurred at K-12 schools from 2008 to 2017.

Of the 25 shootings studied, perpetrators acquired firearms from the home of a parent or close relative in 19 cases. Some perpetrators removed the guns from locked wooden or glass cabinets, or found them locked in vehicles or hidden in closets.

Keep up with Tampa Bay’s top headlines

Subscribe to our free DayStarter newsletter

You’re all signed up!

Want more of our free, weekly newsletters in your inbox? Let’s get started.

Besides the 12 cases in which the shooters obtained the guns from spaces deemed unsecure, perpetrators in four incidents accessed firearms from more secured locations. Although the guns were in a locked gun safe or case, the shooters knew the combination, or where the keys were kept, or could guess the password. If those four cases are included in Harris’ “not secured” count, the percentage is closer to 64%.

In the three remaining cases, researchers could not determine whether the firearm had been secured.

The study didn’t examine school attacks involving perpetrators who researchers said couldn’t be identified, or incidents related to “gang violence, drug violence, or other incidents with a strong suggestion of a separate criminal nexus.” It also didn’t include in its analysis “spontaneous acts,” such as after “an unplanned fight or other sudden confrontation.”

When is a gun considered unsecured?

An “unsecured” or “accessible” firearm is typically defined as one that is not safely stored in a gun safe, unloaded and separated from ammunition.

“The standard for safe and secure storage is that unauthorized or at-risk people cannot access them,” said Dr. Katherine Hoops, an assistant professor of pediatric critical care who researches public health approaches to prevent firearm injury and violence.

Under that standard, Hoops said, unauthorized people “don’t have a key or the combination to the safe.”

Garen Wintemute, director of the University of California, Davis’ Violence Prevention Research Program, said “secured” means that firearms are locked up and unloaded. “‘Locked up’ doesn’t have to mean locked inside something; there can be a lock placed on the firearm,” he said, with the ammunition stored in a separate location.

What other research shows about gun storage, school shootings

There is little data showing how often unsecured guns obtained from homes are being used in school shootings.

In 2019, The Wall Street Journal published an analysis of nearly three dozen mass shootings that have taken place at U.S. schools since 1990. The Journal found that 26 of 39 shooters, or about 66%, “had easy access to guns.” The newspaper said “easy access” indicated that “the shooter knew where unsecured guns were in the house, had access to home gun safes or purchased the guns themselves.”

One 2021 study compared shootings that occur at K-12 schools and colleges with mass shootings more broadly.

The report defined a K-12 school shooting as one that occurs at school during the school day, involves one or more perpetrators who are current or former students, and injures or kills at least one person. Using this definition, researchers identified 57 K-12 school shootings from 2001 to 2018.

Harris said that 75% of school shootings “resulted from a gun that was not secured.”

Harris based her statement on one 2019 study that examined 25 school shootings. It did not find that three-quarters of guns used in those shootings came from unsecured locations. The study found that 19 shootings were carried out with firearms taken from family homes. Of those, 12 came from unsecured or readily accessible locations, the authors said — about 48% of the shootings studied. Another four came from spaces that researchers considered “more secure” but that perpetrators were able to access because they had keys, combinations or passwords. If those are tallied in, the percentage is closer to 64%.

Experts say more robust data is needed to better understand the link between gun storage and school shootings. However, a few studies have shown that around half of these incidents are carried out with firearms obtained from unsecured or otherwise accessible locations in family homes.

Harris’ statement contains an element of truth — the best available data suggests a relationship between unsecured guns at home and school shootings — but her statistic is off and ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. We rate it Mostly False.

Samantha Putterman is the Florida government reporter for PolitiFact.

MORE FOR YOU

• Advertisement

ONLY AVAILABLE FOR SUBSCRIBERS

The Tampa Bay Times e-Newspaper is a digital replica of the printed paper seven days a week that is available to read on desktop, mobile, and our app for subscribers only. To enjoy the e-Newspaper every day, please subscribe.

• Visit the University of Nebraska–Lincoln
• Apply to the University of Nebraska–Lincoln
• Give to the University of Nebraska–Lincoln

Search Form

Nebraska on-farm research network releases 2023 research results publication.

The Nebraska On-Farm Research Network (NOFRN) is placing research results into producers’ hands through its 2023 Research Results book — a publication that highlights findings from approximately 80 on-farm research studies conducted in Nebraska during the 2023 growing season.

"The research results in this book equip producers with the tools to harness local insights, enabling them to make well-informed decisions that optimize both productivity and profitability on their own operation" said Taylor Lexow, NOFRN Project Coordinator.

Studies in the 2023 Research Results book cover various topics, including crop production, fertility and soil management, non-traditional products, cover crops, crop protection and equipment. The 2023 publication, along with publications from previous years, is now available on the NOFRN’s website.

With planting season upon us, now is the time to dig deeper into agricultural practices and determine what best fits the needs of every operation. Download a copy of the 2023 Research Results book today from the NOFRN site .

For more information about the 2023 Research Results book or the NOFRN, please contact Taylor Lexow at 402-245-2222 .

About the NOFRN

The Nebraska On-Farm Research Network (NOFRN) is a program of Nebraska Extension that partners with farmers to evaluate agricultural practices and provide innovative solutions that impact farm productivity, profitability and sustainability. It is supported by the Nebraska Corn Board, the Nebraska Corn Growers Association, the Nebraska Soybean Checkoff and the Nebraska Dry Bean Commission. To learn more about the NOFRN, visit its website .

2023 Research Results Book

Online Master of Science in Agronomy

With a focus on industry applications and research, the online program is designed with maximum flexibility for today's working professionals.

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

• Wealth Surged in the Pandemic, but Debt Endures for Poorer Black and Hispanic Families

2. Wealth gaps across racial and ethnic groups

Table of contents.

• The range of wealth within racial and ethnic groups
• The share of racial or ethnic groups’ wealth held by richer households, not counting the top 1%
• Households with no wealth or in debt
• How wealth varies by race and ethnicity
• The wealth of White households relative to the wealth of other households
• Households in the lower, middle or upper tiers of wealth
• The wealth of U.S. households by income tier
• Racial and ethnic wealth gaps by income tier
• Types of assets owned by U.S. households
• The value of assets owned by households
• The importance of home equity
• The debt level of households
• How high is household debt?
• Acknowledgments
• Data source
• Race and ethnicity
• Household head
• Adjusting for inflation
• Defining income tiers
• Statistical testing

Household wealth or net worth is the value of assets owned by every member of the household minus their debt. The terms are used interchangeably in this report. Assets include owned homes, vehicles, financial accounts, retirement accounts, stocks, bonds and mutual funds, and more. Debt refers to home mortgage loans, education loans, credit card balances, and any other loan or credit extended to the household. Net worth is negative when debt levels are greater than asset values. ( Refer to the methodology for more details.)

“Poorer,” “more solvent,” “wealthier” and “richer” refer to a household’s wealth status relative to other households of the same race and ethnicity . Poorer households rank in the bottom 25% when compared with other households of the same race and ethnicity; more solvent households place from the 25th up to and including the 50th percentile; wealthier households from the 50th up to and including the 75th percentile; and the richer are in the top 25%. The bottom 1% and the top 1% are excluded prior to the ranking so extreme values do not affect estimates for poorer and richer households.

Lower, middle and upper wealth tiers refer to a household’s wealth status relative to all other households in the U.S. The middle wealth tier consists of households whose wealth lies between one-quarter to four times as much as the median wealth of U.S. households – between $41,700 and $667,500 in 2021. Households in the lower wealth tier had wealth less than $41,700, and households in the upper wealth tier had wealth more than $667,500. The wealth tier boundaries vary across years. (Dollar amounts are expressed in December 2021 prices.)

Middle-income households are those with an income that is two-thirds to double that of the U.S. median household income, after incomes have been adjusted for household size and difference in the cost of living across areas. This was about $4,800 to $14,300 monthly in December 2021, for a household of three. Lower-income households had incomes less than $4,800, and upper-income households had incomes greater than $14,300. The income tier boundaries vary across years. (Dollar amounts are expressed in December 2021 prices.)

Households are grouped by the race and ethnicity of the survey reference person, or the household head. White, Black and Asian include those who report being only one race and are not Hispanic. Multiracial includes non-Hispanics of two or more races. Hispanics are of any race. American Indian or Pacific Islander households are not covered in our analysis because of small sample sizes.

The increase in the wealth of U.S. households from 2019 to 2021 was spread widely across racial and ethnic groups. Despite improved fortunes, Black, Hispanic and multiracial households trailed White and Asian households by large margins from the following perspectives, both before and after the pandemic:

• Their wealth relative to the wealth of White and Asian households.
• The shares of households that are in the middle or upper tiers of wealth.

Asian households overall had more wealth than other households two years since the start of the pandemic. In 2021, Asian households had a median net worth of $320,900, compared with $250,400 for White households. The median net worth of Hispanic households ($48,700) and Black households ($27,100) was much less.

In dollar amounts, the wealth gap between White households and Black and Hispanic households increased from 2019 to 2021. For example, in 2019, the typical White household had $168,800 more in wealth than the typical Hispanic household. This gap increased to $201,700 in 2021.

In percentage terms, Black (77%), Hispanic (42%), Asian (43%) and White (23%) households all experienced strong gains in median wealth from 2019 to 2021.

What factors might explain the large wealth gaps across racial and ethnic groups that have endured for decades, if not longer ?

With respect to Black households, evidence points to the role of slavery and post-slavery practices, such as segregation, that created disparate opportunities for wealth accumulation . For Hispanic households, the relative youth of the population and immigration status play a role. In turn, these factors likely contribute to the lower rates and sizes of inheritances received by Black and Hispanic households in comparison with White households.

Asian households overall have more wealth than other households partly because of the higher level of education among Asian adults . In 2021, 61% of Asians ages 25 and older had a bachelor’s degree or higher level of education, compared with 42% of White adults. As a result, the typical Asian household has a much higher income than other households, with more potential for building wealth. But the Asian American population is very diverse, and income varies widely across Asian origin groups . As shown in the following chapter , lower-income Asian households had less wealth than lower-income White households in 2021.

In 2021, the typical White household had 9.2 times as much wealth as the typical Black household – $250,400 vs. $27,100. This ratio stood at 13.3 in 2019, prior to the onset of the pandemic.

White households also had significantly more wealth than Hispanic households (5.1 times) and multiracial households (3.0 times) in 2021. But the median wealth of White households was about 20% less than that of Asian households.

The wealth gaps between White households and Black and Hispanic households in 2019 and 2021 are in line with recent history . But the apparent shrinking of racial and ethnic wealth gaps during the pandemic stands in contrast with what happened during the Great Recession of 2007-09 .

In the Great Recession, the median wealth of White households jumped to nearly 20 times the wealth of Black households and 15 times that of Hispanic households. The key factors then were a sharp decline in home prices and a steep rise in home foreclosures , non-events during the pandemic. Black and Hispanic households saw more harm from these developments during the Great Recession because housing is a more valuable part of their collection of assets .

How does the wealth of a household compare with all other U.S. households? What shares of households are in the middle tier of wealth, and what shares are in the lower or upper tiers?

To address these questions, we grouped U.S. households into three tiers of wealth. The middle tier consists of households whose wealth lies between one-quarter and four times the median wealth of U.S. households – between $41,700 and $667,500 in 2021. Households in the lower tier had wealth less than $41,700 in 2021, and households in the upper tier had wealth more than $667,500.

Fewer than half of U.S. households (44%, or 59 million) were in the middle tier in 2021. This was so despite the wide range of the middle tier – those near the top had 16 times as much wealth as those near the bottom. At the same time, about a third of households (32%, or 43 million) were in the lower wealth tier, and about a quarter (23%, or 31 million) were in the upper tier.

Only 45% of Black households were in either the middle or upper wealth tiers in 2021, the lowest share among the groups examined. The majority of Black households (55%) were in the lower wealth tier in 2021 – that is, they had less than $41,700 in wealth. A somewhat greater share of Hispanic households (52%) were in the middle or upper wealth tier, and 48% were in the lower wealth tier.

In contrast, more than 70% of White and Asian households were in either the middle or upper wealth tier. Roughly one-third of Asian households (36%) were in the upper tier alone, with a net worth of more than $667,500 in 2021. Slightly more than a quarter (28%) of White households were in the upper tier.

Increases in household wealth during the pandemic did lead to a more equal distribution of wealth. The share of households in the middle tier increased from 41% in 2019 to 44% in 2021. Meanwhile, the shares of households in the lower and upper wealth tiers edged down by 2 percentage points each.

A similar shift to the middle was seen in Hispanic and White households, whose shares in the middle wealth tier increased by 3 to 4 points from 2019 to 2021. However, no such change was experienced by Asian households, with their share in the middle wealth tier holding at 39%.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Asian Americans
• Black Americans
• COVID-19 & the Economy
• Economic Inequality
• Hispanics/Latinos
• Income & Wages
• Income, Wealth & Poverty
• Racial & Ethnic Groups

Key facts about Asian Americans living in poverty

Methodology: 2023 focus groups of asian americans, 1 in 10: redefining the asian american dream (short film), the hardships and dreams of asian americans living in poverty, key facts about asian american eligible voters in 2024, most popular, report materials.

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Age & Generations
• Coronavirus (COVID-19)
• Economy & Work
• Family & Relationships
• Gender & LGBTQ
• Immigration & Migration
• International Affairs
• Internet & Technology
• Methodological Research
• News Habits & Media
• Non-U.S. Governments
• Other Topics
• Politics & Policy
• Race & Ethnicity
• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Copyright 2024 Pew Research Center

Terms & Conditions

Privacy Policy

Cookie Settings

Reprints, Permissions & Use Policy