Record: Khairul Azhar Jamaludin, Norlidah Alias, and Dorothy DeWitt, “Research and Trends in the Studies of Homeschooling Practices: A Review on Selected Journals” in The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology (2015): 111-119. [Article]
Summary: Jamaludin, Alias, and DeWitt are from the Faculty of Education at the University of Malaya in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. This article looks for trends in homeschooling research by analyzing 11 homeschooling articles from various educational journals.Here are the eleven articles that the authors chose for their review with links to our own reviews of the articles:
- Green-Hennessy (2014). Compares the drug-use and juvenile delinquency of homeschooled teenagers to their public-schooled peers.
- Vigilant, Anderson & Trefethren (2014). Analyzes the role of homeschooling fathers.
- Korkmaz & Duman (2014). Explores the public understanding of homeschooling in Turkey.
- Kraftl (2013). Uses homeschooling as a lens to examine several theoretical approaches to the study of human geography.
- Jolly, Matthews & Nester (2012). Interviews the parents of gifted homeschoolers.
- Mazama & Lundy (2012). Interviews Black homeschooling parents and uncovers racism as one of their motivations for homeschooling.
- Hanna (2012). Uses a longitudinal study to investigate changes in homeschooling practices from 1998 to 2008.
- Hurlbutt (2011). Interviews parents who homeschool their children with Autism Spectrum Disorders.
- Ice & Hoover-Dempsey (2011). Compares the motivations of homeschooling parents to the motivations of parents who do not homeschool their children.
- Blok & Karsten (2011). Investigates home education inspection practices in several European countries.
- van Schalkwyk & Bouwer (2011). Interviews several homeschooled children from various cultural backgrounds in South Africa.
Now they begin analyzing the common features of these articles:
- Research setting: Seven studies were conducted in the US, while the other four studies were conducted in Turkey, the UK, the EU, and South Africa. The authors note that within the US, homeschooling research (and homeschooling itself) has branched out from its Christian roots to look at the practice from many different angles.
- Sample selection: All of the studies, except two, used homeschooling families, especially mothers, as their sample since parents are critical in arranging the education of homeschooled children. However, Vigilant et al. (2014) provided the interesting perspective of homeschooling fathers. As for the remaining studies, Green-Hennessy (2014) used teengaers as her sample, and Korkmaz & Duman (2014) used parents with no homeschooling experience.
- Data collection method: Data was collected through interviews (9 studies), surveys/questionnaires (6 studies), and observations (5 studies). The authors note that homeschooling research has improved in its collection of empirical research in recent years.
- Focus and issue covered: 5 studies investigated the effectiveness of homeschooling, and 4 studies mapped homeschooling practices in different cultural environments. Finally, Blok & Karsten (2011) investigated the role of inspections in homeschooling, and Korkmaz and Duman (2014) gathered the public opinion of homeschooling in Turkey.
- Themes of the findings: The first theme they found was that most of the studies spoke positively of homeschooling. In particular, the studies spoke of the ability to provide personalized instruction, a safe and healthy learning environment, and appropriate learning supports for special-needs and gifted children. The other theme they found was that most of the studies offered considerations for an effective homeschooling practice. Mainly they conclude that for homeschooling to be successful, parents should be prepared to meet children’s learning needs.
Appraisal: While many of the trends they note are correct, the authors provide no explanation for why they chose these eleven articles. Are they representative of recent trends? Are they the cream of the crop? It is unclear why these were chosen, making the generalizations and analysis seem arbitrary. Overall, this article might be helpful for someone unacquainted with the literature to gain insight into some intriguing studies and how they fit together in the bigger picture, but it does not go in-depth enough to contribute anything to the literature that is not already documented elsewhere. Also, the authors fail the read the articles critically. While some of the studies like Green-Hennessy (2014), Vigilant, Anderson & Trefethren (2014), Mazama & Lundy (2012), and Hanna (2012) are well-designed studies that have provided meaningful contributions to homeschooling research, others like Kraftl (2013) and Ice & Hoover-Dempsey (2011) are poorly designed studies that must be treated cautiously. The authors’ failure to dig beyond the surface claims of the articles damages their ability to analyze the literature’s description of current homeschooling practices.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in reviews are not the official views of ICHER or of its members. For more information about ICHER’s Reviews, please see the «About these Reviews» Section.