When I was writing these articles on education for this issue of Gentle Spirit, I came across a paper written in 1993 assessing Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences. In general, the author was concerned that communities might "pick and choose" which intelligences would be emphasized based on various cultural or ethnic or community considerations, and that schools might (gasp!) begin to reflect community goals and standards, which would differ from school to school and community to community, with the entire school system nationally ultimately devolving into a chaos of individuality via what he described as an "ideological tribalism." He was especially critical of abandoning a "universal criteria for intelligence," and wondered whether individuals would not be encouraged to simply "pick and choose between various subculturally valued competencies and proclaim their own unique set of abilities as equally legitimate to any other set?" As everyone knows, we can’t have that! At one point the author throws up his hands in despair and asks, "If the above scenario was to become an actuality, how would an educational institution go about its job?"

And that was a very good question. That was the best sentence in his whole essay.

This question was iterated and reiterated many times in essays and articles I read which were responsive to recent research related to the brain, learning and intelligence. Over and over again, thoughtful people mused over the significance of the findings and wondered aloud whether it was possible for schools to make the kind of changes which may, in fact, be called for if they are to do right by the nation’s children.

I hope teachers and school district officials and parents make themselves aware of what we are learning about learning. And I hope, as a nation, we devote ourselves to finding solutions to the problems the research illuminates. I hope we will find ways to answer the questions which face us.

Looking at the research and findings as a homeschooling parent, I cannot recall a time ever, since I first started homeschooling, when I was so enthused and encouraged by educational research (!) as I am today, nor can I recall any time when I was so glad to have chosen homeschooling for my children. I’ve made a few unfortunate decisions in my life, but homeschooling is one I will never regret.

The truth is that over and over the research confirms what homeschooling parents have always known - under certain circumstances, and with a few qualifications, home is arguably the best environment for learning.

Here are some preliminary thoughts based on the information I presented on learning and the brain. I have made some observations, advanced a theory or two, and attempted to apply some of the findings in specific ways to homeschooling situations. I expect that as I learn more, I will revise my theories and develop new ones. For now, I hope to be of specific encouragement to homeschooling families. Again, I am not an expert. What I know, I know by my own research and study, by virtue of 17 years of homeschooling, and by having known and heard from thousands of homeschoolers over the past 10 years.

Since learning is directly proportional to the degree of interaction between children and their environments, then the more freely children are allowed to explore, touch, sense, examine, relate, the greater their intelligence will be. Children at home with attentive, caring parents are in the best possible position to receive encouragement during the "windows of opportunity" for various kinds of aptitudes. Over and over the research illuminates the importance of parents and others engaging with their children, nurturing and caring for them, providing them with every opportunity to explore the world.

Children who are fragile for any reason must be spared as much unnecessary stress as possible, because it wreaks havoc with their nervous systems. They have every chance to learn, develop and grow strong if they are cared for by parents who understand their specific strengths and weaknesses and who can provide a safe place for exploration. Children who do not do well in structured schooling environments (and who are often labeled as differently-abled) often thrive at home.

Learning is an active process with the brain constructing itself in response to engagement with other people and the surrounding environment. Unless rote memory is connected with other associations and experiences, it is not usable or valuable. Children require many different kinds of stimulation to learn.

The more children learn, the more able they are to learn by virtue of of physical changes and growth in the brain itself. Enriched environments provide the greatest opportunity for learning. Learning is not a passive process. It is not a matter of someone instructing and someone being the recipient of instruction.

Active engagement and learning periods must give way to times of rest where children assimilate what they have learned. Home is the perfect environment for this. Children are free to engage and disengage as often as they like.

Just as children learn to smile, hold a cup, walk, talk, jump and run without help, without being taught, their "modular" brains are equipped, hardwired, to interact with enriched, nourishing environments to learn and grow throughout their lives. Patient, caring, attentive parents are great facilitators for this learning process. Over and over in the articles I read, I saw proposals to limit class size in order to provide maximum opportunity for children to engage with their teachers. Parents do not need to "teach" as much as they need to observe their children, be available for help and support, and serve as a resource and mentor.

Fear and stress keep children from learning and from remembering what they do learn.

Of all of the recent findings, the ones which concern me the most are those which relate to the effect of fear and stress on children. We know from the research that when children are afraid or anxious, they simply cannot learn. If they are frequently afraid or anxious, their ability to learn may be permanently impaired. It is my opinion that this is the most compelling of arguments for noncoercive parenting.

Where parents coerce children, especially homeschooling parents, who are with their children all day long, children will experience fear and stress—fear of punishment, fear of "consequences", anxiety over performance or what parents require.

The atmosphere most conducive to learning includes open-ended expectations, work and study which is meaningful to children and which is understood to have its own intrinsic rewards, tasks which are manageable and for which there is plenty of support, and an absence of fear, anxiety and stress. This is a description of an unschooling, noncoercive household.

I have learned via unschooling my own children that it is often a messy, unpredictable, and even chaotic process. Times of growing, thriving productivity are followed by times of stillness and waiting. My role as a mom has been mainly to watch, walk alongside, and serve as a help and a resource. Who could ever improve upon a jungle? What is there to do but watch it, glory in it, sit back and watch the show?

One kind of intelligence need not be celebrated at home. Parents are uniquely able to observe and understand the innate intelligences of their children.

Children need not be ashamed to show their feelings and can be helped to handle their feelings. Spending time with parents and siblings creates a closeness in relationship which encourages empathy. Freedom to learn in one’s own way and time creates hope and optimism, and hence, motivation. And should any of these be lacking, all of the suggested remedies are available all the time at home: music, games, discussions, trips, group projects, coopeartive learning, physical activity, the arts.

Unschoolers in general avoid all of the creativity-killers - surveillance, evaluation, rewards, competition, over control, pressure, and restricting of choices.

· Surveillance: hovering over children, making them feel they are constantly being watched while they are working; under constant observation, the risk-taking, creative urge goes underground and hides;

· Evaluation: Constantly making kids worry about how they are doing; this interferes with satisfaction with their own accomplishments;

· Rewards: The excessive use of prizes deprives a child of the intrinsic pleasure of creative activity;

· Competition: Putting kids in win-lose situations, where only one person can come out on top

· Over-control: Constantly telling children how to do things; conveying the idea that exploration is frivolous and originality is a mistake

· Restricting choices: Telling children which activities they should engage in instead of letting them follow where their curiosity and passions; restricts active exploration and experimentation which might lead to creative discovery and production.

· Pressure: Establishing grandiose expectations for a child’s performance; often ends up instilling aversion for a subject or activity.