2017-03-10 14:05

霍尔特提出主义教育阻碍社会发展[ 12 ]无效。此外,Holt认为,国内研究教孩子们关于个人主义和提高他们的尊重、理解和人权[ 13 ]。但Holt的建议批评和认为这样的学校教孩子们,他们的个人需求比大社会更重要,阻碍了民主的目标。[ 14 ],但在现代世界的问题,社会发展本质上是与儿童的人权和尊重理解的人;以及为了尊重促进公民社会的法律和治理的依从性。然而,如果家庭教育是消除然后个人的权利将被忽略,对制度和无效的人类社会发展的理解会被创建。如果一个人把这种观点与人性的本质联系起来,就应该遵循教育和发展智力的最佳方法,这是一个客观的目标。同样来自Franzosa的说法纯粹是西化的教育观和打击民主观和个人主义不可能在所有的文化中是合适的。因此,这导致一个人提到文化相对主义,但正如以前的论点显示,个人主义和人权存在于所有的文化。总之,家庭教育可以帮助儿童尊重和促进个人主义和人权在他们的文化背景下,而不是客观的,反社会的现代教育机构。在下面的讨论中,我们将重点讨论反社会制度的问题,以及社会儿童发展的问题。这导致了一个情况;孩子恐吓和其他儿童的反社会行为欺负;孩子失去学习的价值和他们的智慧提升;家长成为孩子逃学刑事责任即使他们采取所有合理的措施来促进孩子带枪到学校的出勤率;并谋杀他们的同龄人群众;是不教孩子如何尊重别人的人权,这些权利是通过他们参加机构的侵蚀;学习文化和宗教是通过所谓的价值中立的方式侵蚀,这实际上促进了西化的理想;和公平正义不在这个机构除了玩。因此,也许Holt是对他的推广家庭教育对儿童社会性发展问题的一种有效的补救措施。[ 15 ] Franzosa认为,这种说法过于简化和更复杂的,多方面的制度教育方法是必要的。


Holt proposes that it is the void of institutionalism of education that impedes social development[12]. In addition Holt argues that home study teaches children about individualism and enhances their respect and understanding and human rights[13]. However there are critics of Holt’s proposal and argue that such schooling teaches children that their individual needs are more important than the larger society and impedes the goals of democracy.[14] Yet a question of social development in the modern world is inherently tied into children’s understanding of human rights and respect for the individuals; as well as adherence to law and governance in respect to promoting a civil society. However if home schooling was eliminated then the rights of the individual would be ignored and a move towards institutionalism and a void like understanding of humanity and social development would be created. Also if one connects such arguments to the essence of humanity, the best method for education and development of one’s intellect should be followed, which is an objective goal. Also the argument from Franzosa is purely a westernized view of education and the combating views of democracy and individualism may not be appropriate in all cultures. Therefore this causes one to refer to cultural relativism, but as the previous argument shows individualism and human rights are present in all cultures. In short home schooling can aid children to respect and promote individualism and human rights within the context of their culture, rather than the objective, anti-social institutions of modern education. The problems of the anti-social system will be highlighted in the following discussions; as well as illustrating the problems with the development of children socially. This has resulted in a situation where; children are intimidated and bullied by other children’s anti-social behaviour; children lose the value of learning and the promotion of their intellect; parents become criminally liable for their children’s truancy even if they take all reasonable steps to promote attendance; children take guns into school and murder their peers on the masses; children are not taught to respect other’s human rights because these rights are eroded by the institution they attend; cultural learning and religion is eroded by a so called value-neutral approach, which in fact promotes westernized ideals; and the fairness and justice do not play apart in this institution. Therefore maybe Holt is right in his promotion of home schooling as an effective remedy for the problems in children’s social development.[15] Franzosa argues that this argument is too simplified and a more complex, multifaceted approach to institutional education is necessary.