Facebook Posts
Every time one of these pieces comes out, I want to hurl my battered copy of the original Well-Trained Mind at my laptop.
How many times can mainstream media outlets rediscover the Great Homeschool Conventions and declare that, gee whiz, this is what home schooling is all about? There are SO MANY families that are NOT home educating for the reasons described in this piece, but because THEY WANT THEIR CHILDREN TO LEARN WITHOUT DISTRESS.
Excuse the gratuitious self-promotion, but I do wish someone at the Times would bother to read Rethinking School as they do (whatever small amount of) research for these stories.
The only bright line in this is, "As a veteran home-schooler, Mr. De Gree said he had been attending various home-schooling conventions for more than a decade. He noted that even though the movement had grown bigger, it seemed to him that conferences like the Great Homeschool Conventions had become smaller, because more parents were finding their curricula and teaching tips on social media."
Well, thank goodness for that. The rest of the story seems to think that GHC *is* home education.
If you've been following my posts for any length of time, you'll understand why I have a problem with that.
**
The speaker, Chris Cardiff, was urging the room of parents to take control over their children’s understanding of American history. His presentation raced through the “competing narratives” that young children faced: “celebrate ‘diversity,’” it went, versus “e pluribus unum.”
“Why would you have targeting of young children?” Mr. Cardiff said. “Because, first of all, people on the left side of the political spectrum are targeting preschoolers with their version of history.”
It was the start of a gathering, one of several run across the country by a group called the Great Homeschool Conventions, which brings together families who are part of America’s fast ballooning and politically forceful home-schooling movement.
In July, these families descended on a water park resort in Round Rock, Texas, where conference rooms were steps away from colorful mega-slides and plaster hippopotami. The children hit the lazy river while their parents attended sessions about designing bible-driven curricula and helping their offspring “safely navigate our hypersexual culture.” They discussed how to install patriotic values in their children and whether to send them off to college, where some speakers worried they would be exposed to left-wing values.
“At this point, I’m generally advocating people not going to college, unless you’re going into STEM,” one speaker, Lisa Nehring, told the room, later adding, “I sound like ‘Oh my gosh, the world is going to end’ — and it is!”
End times on the horizon or not, there was a sense at the convention that these parents were part of a movement on the cultural up-and-up. A perfect storm of politics, policy and cultural shifts had combined to create the conditions for home-schooling to spread.
Many of them had decided to home-school because they worried about their children going into classrooms where they could absorb lessons their parents found objectionable: that the human species evolved instead of being created by God, for example. Or that America’s founding fathers were fallible...All this has collided with a cultural moment in which influencers on the right are encouraging a traditional conception of marriage and family, where one income, earned by a man, should suffice, and a wife’s role is to stay at home. This notion seems to have caught fire particularly in its most social-media friendly incarnation, where softly lit asparagus tarts and phonics lessons are appealing to certain members of a new generation, which also leads to newcomers finding home-schooling.
**
What??? It's problematic to believe that America's founding fathers were fallible? I'm sorry, were they all reincarnations of Jesus? (That seems theologically complicated.) And what is with the asparagus tarts??
I'm actually supposed to be on vacation this week, so I'm going to go have a glass of wine and wait for my blood pressure to go back down.
Inside a Gathering of America’s Growing Home-School Movement
www.nytimes.com
The pandemic supercharged interest. Now, a cultural and political emphasis on women staying at home is continuing to fuel growth.2 days ago
One of many reasons I'm glad you started a podcast: now I can *hear* your exasperation in posts like this one. 😅
This just emphasizes even more how much I wish there was a different convention with people like you and Julie! ❤️
What’s surprising to me about articles like this is that *to me* the most interesting rise in homeschooling is in the secular side. When most of the public thinks of homeschooling, what they think of is super religious families, homeschooling to shelter their kids from society. Why not write about the thousands of families who are homeschooling secularly, who focus on academics, who have a ton of interesting and thoughtful reasons that they have chosen to keep their children out of traditional public/private schools. I guess it would take more research, but it would surely be a more interesting article. 🤷♀️
Agree. Many of us just want our kids to learn without distress. Well said. I quit going to the GHC years ago, but when Tucker Carlson headlined one of their recent conventions, I knew I had made the right decision.
We used WTM, and I'm grateful for the freedom it gave us. My oldest three are boys--an outdoorsy lot who chose technical colleges. They are adults with stable, good jobs and no debt. Yacht mechanic, electrician, welder.
Dr. Bauer, I used your Well-Trained Mind book and a good deal of your curriculum when I was homeschooling my kids, and am now pursuing a PhD. I have always appreciated your intellect, candor, and wit, and continue to follow your work. I'm so glad for refreshing voices like yours. Keep it up.
My daughter was contacted by Ms. Goldberg and interviewed for this article - twice. We knew from the questions she was asked the angle this story would take. There are any number of reasons she may not have made it into the story, but I’m pretty sure her answers didn’t provide what the NYT was looking for. 😉 It was a great learning opportunity for our whole family to discuss bias in journalism. My takeaway was that it was really a shame that the journalist didn’t bring a genuine curiosity to the subject. She knew what she wanted to say before she did any “research”.
I attended a small American school in a 3rd world country for 4th - 8th grades. We only had school from 8-noon and I was finished with all my subjects by about 10:30. When I started 9th grade in the States, I couldn't believe how long and boring the days were. I couldn't sprint ahead in subjects I was good at, so my excitement for learning diminished. I had a governor on my learning speed in subjects I excelled in, so I didn't have a great feeling to offset the subjects I struggled in. That was my reason for homeschooling - so my children would retain a love for learning and exploring.
My 3 Well Trained Mind scholars are now age 35, 33, and 30. All have graduate degrees. I know the truth 🤭
Just a quick note — while the article quoted Lisa Nehring , it didn’t include her full context. Anyone who’s followed her for any length of time knows she’s talking about the Fourth Industrial Revolution and how modern education systems often fail to prepare students for a rapidly changing world. Far from a doomsday message, her real focus is on critical thinking and actually aligns really well with classical homeschooling. She just applies the SAMR model to help families adapt and thrive in this new era. It’s about equipping, not fear-mongering.
I read this article when it came out and I was deeply annoyed by it. Although I share your sentiment I would never hurl my copy of The Well Trained Mind! 😆 It's much too valuable to me. It's on my lap right now as I prepare for my 6th year of homeschooling. 😊
I can't keep my temper and comment on that article, but I first read that line as "softly lit asparagus" and pictured asparagus lit like candles in the dark. The imagery didn't improve when I re-read the phrase to include "tarts".
I’m disappointed that a lot of people commenting here don’t seem to realize or acknowledge there are very good reasons for the negative perception homeschooling has. I am not anti homeschooling, but as a former homeschooled child, I’d like to hear more willingness from our own camp to admit to the issues we have - like any other camp.
Meanwhile, as historians are using the tech available to them to find things like the lost colony of Roanoke, history *is* rewritten because, lo and behold, history is not the same thing as the past. We discover new things because past historians didn't always get it "right," not because there's a bogeyman wrapped up in a political agenda.
Susan, we started homeschooling in 1998, and somehow connected with you prior to WTM. We were living in C-ville, VA at the time and you took a phone call from me and provided guidance while I waited for my first copy of WTM. I'll forever be grateful for your voice and your perspective. We were one of those families that did not home educate for the reasons described in this piece. We were not afraid of culture, but instead took advantage of every opportunity we could to engage in ways that made sense for us. Our kids are all grown up now and thriving in ways that align with who they are. One is a mom of four and runs a nonprofit that teaches strings to kids who couldn't afford lessons otherwise, another is pursuing her PhD at Harvard in global economics, another is an incredible photographer and marketing expert with a brilliant mind for business, another is a backpacking guide in AK and WY, another is a computer engineer, another works for a nonprofit focusing on housing equity, and our youngest works at Petsmart because she loves dogs. 🙂 Homeschooling the WTM way gave them freedom, not only for a glorious childhood of climbing trees, reading, and designing "towns" by our creek, but also to become fully who they are, who God created them to be, with a passion for learning, exploration, and life to the full. Just thought you might want to hear a little bit about the fruit of your work. Deeply grateful for you, Susan - your voice, your writing, your perspective!
I went to a GHC the first year I homeschooled 14 years ago, mostly for the curricula fair they were holding, but I did attend a couple sessions. Quickly discovered the while affair (curricula and all) was very Bible-focused, and moved on 😉 We homeschooled to provide an unique, comprehensive and richly varied educational experience for our son, tailored to his interests and learning styles, and free of all the public school schedules, tests, and nonsense. We were out in the world, experiencing a wide range of activities, studying the required academics, but also diving more deeply into those things that inspired or interested him. He is happily graduated and pursuing his own life as a creative artist, with the confidence and competence that his life experience helped instill in him. I wish more people would realize that many, many homeschoolers are passing on public school for reasons other than the Bible... Homeschooling offers a world of opportunity to kids when they aren't stuck at a desk for 60 percent of their waking hours every week. Unfortunately the 'religious' homeschoolers seems to have a louder voice, especially now...
I hate that the media seem to willfully blind themselves to the blatant fact that there is not one homogenous "homeschooling movement."
I read that NYT article. As one who just graduated my only child using Ambleside (and most of your history books, for kids and adults) it made my heart very sad to think of the insane bias presented against those of us who thoughtfully and intelligently chose to home school our children. And I was a public school teacher first for 15 years and do not believe home schooling for everyone and that there are great public n private school teachers out there.
Sometimes I wonder if the lack of curiosity on the part of the journalist is due to bias and narrative. It’s pretty exhausting. I admit that as a third generation public school teacher I was prejudiced against homeschooling…until I met some great kids in the wild and they were homeschoolers. Meeting those kids sent me on a journey of homeschool discovery. Sometimes it takes a lot to break through pre-conceived ideas. Susan, in my dreams you call up this journalist and charitably invite him/her to see what you do. Your work is an inspiration!
Even when my Mom started homeschooling me way back in 1990, she made the decision to do so because I was a gifted ADHD student who was bored to tears in the conventional classroom environment. It had nothing to do with any sort of weird religious or political ideology. It was the same when I decided to homeschool my own son, who has just graduated! (Woot woot)
Hello Susan, my husband and I was introduced to the Well Trained Mind original copy and we really saw the structure of our homeschooling curriculum. This is a powerful guide of homeschooling. We taught our son through 12 grade and now he is doing well in the college arena, in fact making the President's List 3 times and the Dean's List once. He has great study habits and is really focusing on his completion. Also, he is a thinker and makes his own decisions. Thank you for writing this book!!!!!
Rethinking School is the number one book that I recommend to others who ask me about my educational choices. I love that it isn't focused on home education exclusively
This is not in defense of this messy article, but in the last paragraph you quoted, the author is referring to two things that I understand: 1) Many families choose to homeschool because they don’t want their children to learn big-picture truthful history that includes the faults of our founding fathers. You are, of course, correct that they were not infallible; many homeschooling parents don’t want their children to learn about those faults. These families (and the history curricula they prefer) are probably well-represented at GHC conventions. 2) The “softly lit asparagus tarts and phonics lessons” is a reference to trad wife social media influencers such as Ballerina Farm and Nara Smith. You can find them on Instagram if you want see what they’re doing, because they’ve become a major influence on many homeschooling families in the past few years.
So, I have noticed many posts discouraging kids from going to college lately. Is it just me, or is this new? I didn't go to college, but I have opinions on it. I'm part of a very conservative church culture, and about 10 years ago, I started noticing that all my favorite preachers randomly had degrees (or at least SOME college) in various fields.
I think what we need to take from this is that these conventions are becoming smaller even though there is a larger community because our homeschool community is becoming more diverse. I ran a homeschool group for over 600 families in my area. We all homeschooled for different reasons but we could all come together to have outings so our kids could learn and be social in group settings. Very few people cared whether you were homeschooling for religious reasons, for special needs reasons, or because you didn’t want your child learning in a typical “school” environment. There are nuts on both ends of the spectrum. Don’t get spun up about the article, we know the truth.
A couple of useful follow-ups to my last post about AI taking jobs away: first, an enlightening discussion of the difference between "augmentation" and "replacement," which was definitely a point of confusion in the piece I last put up:
wapo.st/47bZIiI
And then, a fascinating take from a therapist about how Chat GPT does a good job replacing HIS skills, which makes me think (and I know this sounds judgy but there it is) that his particular way of conducting therapy is...less than essential? What do you think?
www.nytimes.com/2025/08/01/opinion/chatgpt-therapist-journal-ai.html?unlocked_article_code=1.bU8....
Opinion | I’m a Therapist. ChatGPT Is Eerily Effective.
www.nytimes.com
I was shocked to see ChatGPT echo the very tone I’d once cultivated.4 days ago
The therapist's op-ed is a great example of how self-sabotage can and does harm others. This person should not be licensed.
Delightful to see that the two things I do for a living are #2 and #5 on the list of jobs most likely to be eliminated by AI, at least according to Microsoft.
I have my doubts, though, along with a whole bunch of unanswered questions.
First of all: what exactly is the definition of "historian" (#2) that the Microsoft tech bros were using? "Chronologist", perhaps? The job of a historian isn't to list everything that happened. It's to find explanations, to tell a story about the human condition that's faithful to the facts but also enters into the motivations,hopes, fears, and ambitions of the past actors. Historians don't just assemble people and places in order. They make arguments about *why* it happened.
Can AI make those arguments? Very likely. This is something I keep wondering about. If it can, will we find those arguments compelling? Will we adopt them? The movie industry has been sounding the alarm for years about AI actors taking jobs away from actual people, but so far, it seems that we prefer our movie stars to be human beings with actual lives, back stories, struggles, and personal charisma. If we are trying to understand the past, will we be content with an argument assembled from a billion points of data by an author who never got sick, never lost a child, and will never die? (Maybe. I just pose the question.)
Second, what on earth is this job called "Writers and Authors" that pops up in #5? Down below, I see Reporters, Technical Writers, and Editors. What category are the TB's (that's the Tech Bros) considering here? There's an alarming lack of definition on this list. What about Substack authors? (Will you follow an AI account and hand over your credit card for the privilege?) What about novelists? (I don't see that anywhere, and by the way, if you'd like to hear more about the 300K word novel that I finished and am now trying to figure out how to make a penny or two from, please let me know.) What about opinion essayists and advice columnists? What about the myriad of ways in which human beings communicate with each other with words?
Again, many unanswered questions--and some super sloppy labelling happening here.
I use AI for research. When I want to know when, where, and who, I ask AI. But explaining why and what? That's still my job. I'm not saying it won't disappear, though, so please keep an eye on this space in case I need to start a GoFundMe to see me through my old age.
fortune.com/2025/07/31/microsoft-research-generative-ai-occupational-impact-jobs-most-and-least-l...
1 week ago
Do you think this is similar to when ebooks came out and people said it would be the end of print? Ebooks certainly changed a lot of things but it didn’t end the print book. I don’t think it will eliminate these jobs but it will change the landscape.
I’ll take ‘things AI gets wrong (again) for $1000’, Alex..
With respect, why would you use AI for research? Given its gross inaccuracies and blatantly false answers, it seems you’d also have to hire an assistant to check everything….resulting in no gained efficiency.
I think it this list is funny. They list pretty much every job but their own - which is interesting because we have already seen AI models write newer and improved AI models (sometimes without being directed to), as well as convincingly code systems, but we have not seen AI do most of these jobs convincingly. I find the absence condemnative of the list.
I don't understand some of this. Passenger attendant - does that mean flight/train/boat attendant? How can that be replaced with AI?
Ha, Facebook wants me to read an AI summary of the comments on this post!
Susan - There is only one person (or thing) that can write history the way you write history, and that is you…
And I am a Translator-Interpreter! 😆
I don't see stall mucker or sheep wrangler or farm stay host or dressage competitor on the list. Luckily you've diversified! Seriously, though, the tech companies are trying to destroy society for profit.
I wish I could say that I was shocked one of my professions is #1. Sadly, as translators get replaced, we will lose the deeper thinking that goes into making translations themselves works of art.
I don't think there are a lot of jobs that will be fully replaced with AI, but I think there are quite a few jobs that might need fewer people doing them. The question isn't whether a role can be replaced, the question (the first one, anyway) is whether a role can be made far more productive. If a particular type of writer can produce three times as much of the same quality work by outsourcing tasks to and supervising an LLM, we need a third as many of that type of writer to produce the same output. Of course, it might also turn out that, when that output requires fewer person-hours of input, we end up wanting a lot more of the now-cheaper output. But, especially in the short run, the prospect of replacing entire jobs with machines is les likely than the prospect of some workers being far more productive and others being replaced.
I think the interpretation that historians do will not be replaced by AI, which is by its very nature derivative rather than creative. And I personally will never choose an AI host/ess or concierge. The personal connection is part of those jobs. Again, I think Microsoft is defining them as “specific question answerers” rather than anything intangible. Microsoft knows how you push its own profits. But seriously, has anyone experienced better customer service since AI rolled out? Or do we waste increasing amounts of time yelling at unthinking, unfeeling recorded voices who literally cannot process unique or complex situations? If a service company advertised “we cost 15% more, but have all-human customer service if you need help”, I’d sign up in a heartbeat.
I finished my Ed.D. at the same time my youngest graduated from our homeschool last year. DOGE eliminated all of the jobs I was applying for.
Yes, would like to hear more about the novel. 😊
Where are Tech Bros on the list? 😂
Mine is on there too, data scientist. As someone who writes code with and peeks under the hood of these LLMs every day, my personal opinion is that every single human job is at risk. Which ones fall first is irrelevant. I also think that demand for human-created art, analysis, and historical insight will go through the roof. Don't panic. People will crave the real thing because it is how we relate to one another.
I’m #1 on the list. I’d go head to head with anybody’s AI if we are being judged on quality.
I tried to have chat gpt make a timeline of ancient history dates for a class, out of order and then with a key. I just thought it would save me some time and I could edit it. It could NOT get the events (correct dates though they were) in order. I kept correcting it and then just finished fixing it myself. I was really surprised.
It all feels very Brave New World… everyone of those jobs, all jobs, deal with human beings to at least a certain level I just don’t see any reality that AI will ever be “human”. I mean we may as a society “allow” this to be tested but… eventually… 🤷♀️
I do massage, so until the tech gets better, I’m safe. 😂 I am a late/never adopter of a lot of tech and I do not want to live in a world where AI is acting and writing and interpreting, etc. I want people, imperfect as they are, at the forefront of all of that. And as to things like models, I can see more and more companies moving to AI models but then I hope that the pushback comes in the form of other companies choosing (due to consumer disgust and outrage) to use models that haven’t been airbrushed to within an inch of their lives so that people can tell they aren’t AI. We’ll want our underwear modeled by people with cellulite and stretch marks so that we know we’re looking at a real body. I already want this, and maybe it will take going way, way to far the other way to have more companies willing to go back to real.
AI even knows that AI could but *should not* replace humans in these roles. ChatGPT says: AI will never fully replace human historians or authors unless we (does anyone else find it annoying when AI includes itself in the collective pronoun along with humans?) no longer care about something deeply human: lived experience, moral judgment, and the ability to interpret meaning from a finite, fallible point of view. Here’s the breakdown: ⸻ ❌ Why AI cannot truly replace historians or authors 1. No Lived Experience AI does not live. It does not suffer, remember, grow, or feel the passage of time. Historians and authors interpret—they do not just recount. Interpretation comes from being embedded in time, culture, and personal struggle. A memoir of war, a re-examination of colonialism, or a novel about grief means something because the writer has been somewhere—physically, emotionally, politically. AI hasn’t. A historian doesn’t just ask “What happened?” but “Why did it matter?” That question requires moral and emotional stakes. ⸻ 2. No Judgment or Perspective AI synthesizes existing ideas. It doesn’t take moral stands. Historians must evaluate competing sources, biases, and context. Authors create meaning through style, voice, pacing, omission. AI can mimic this, but it cannot believe anything. Good history is not a data dump; it’s an argument. Good writing isn’t mimicry; it’s voice and conviction. ⸻ 3. No Original Consciousness AI can remix, generate, and surprise, but it doesn’t originate ideas in the way humans do. It can approximate style, tone, and structure but not the internal evolution of a mind responding to the world over time. A novel or a historical thesis emerges from years of noticing, wondering, questioning. AI can imitate that arc, but it cannot experience it. ⸻ ✅ When AI could take over—and at what cost If society shifts to value efficiency, output, and emotional convenience over depth, AI could replace these roles. In fact, in some niches, it already has: content farms, SEO history summaries, ghostwritten genre fiction. But here’s what we lose: 1. Depth and Friction Human thought involves friction—wrestling with ambiguity, pain, contradiction. AI smooths this over. What we gain in polish, we lose in difficulty—and difficulty is where the best insights come from. 2. Memory and Legacy Human history is not just what happened—it’s how we choose to remember. If we let AI do the remembering, we risk delegating our cultural memory to a system with no stake in that memory. That’s not history. That’s archiving without meaning. 3. Authenticity Readers may not always notice, but at a deep level, people respond to writing that bears marks of human limitation and effort. When that vanishes, writing becomes flavorless—even if it’s technically impressive. ⸻ 🤔 Will people care? Some will. Most won’t—at first. If convenience and cost dominate, most people will accept AI-generated books and history summaries as “good enough.” Especially if they’re not trained to value critical thinking or narrative voice. But: • Some readers will miss the feel of a human presence in the text. • Some scholars will warn that we’re replacing memory with simulation. • Some cultures and subcultures will hold fast, like monks preserving manuscripts. And maybe that’s where meaning will still live. ⸻ 🧭 Final Thought AI can tell us what happened and how it sounded. But only humans can tell us why it mattered—and why we should care. Replacing human historians or authors means deciding that meaning itself doesn’t need a human face. And once we’ve made that trade, it’s unclear whether we can ever get it back.
I think they miss the fact that people are social creatures and want the social interaction sometimes as much as the service. Sure shipping online or going through self check out can sometimes be quicker/easier, but we choose the store or the cashier because that human interface is important. And no, I don't think any amount of tech can program those unique exchanges into even a humanesque form. I still prefer live theater over the"perfection" of something filmed/edited/auto tuned.
Thank you for passing this news on. One day, AI will be doing that for us, too.
I doubt it, particularly the writer/author career. And the one right below that seems applicable, but so far my experience with these AI replacements has been downright disappointing. They simply cannot assist with tech support, which is sort of ironic if you think about it.
And the computer was going to eliminate executive assistants, and robots were going to eliminate janitors, and sanity was going to eliminate presidents. I digress. Anyway, no need to catastrophize. I think this tech will just make historians stronger.