It is known by everyone that school is a child’s second home. The debate about whether a child should be schooled at home or at a literal school makes me consider a child’s situation; unequipped, naive, a beginner, and young; having to make this choice. Honestly, I am not against the idea that teaching children at home is the best schooling for their development. Home and school are both wholly different environments.
Being at school, immersed and surrounded by other children with developmental needs, is another factor for growth and resilience. School is not just a safe place for every child; it is also a place where children must rely on themselves. It is where parents leave their children alone to learn and grow, to navigate their own worlds without having to rely on their parents. For example, being bombarded with schoolwork or at least participating in group work gives one a sense of responsibility. In the end, being able to engage and be active at school gives children something to be proud of, as this can serve as an achievement, driving them to be more and to grow more because they want to achieve beyond. Resilience and independence are foundational areas a child should work on, and it is best to have learned them at school.
It is true that children do learn at home, also. Speaking from my experience, my parents made us do chores from young ages, and it honestly shaped what we could provide to other people when we went our separate ways. Home discipline equipped us to be ready for the realities of life, and frankly speaking, that is indeed development. But, I must say that this development is just another responsibility parents should be committed to. It is just another area for growth for children, and it is best done at home and taught by parents.
What is taught at home should shape a child’s upbringing, but schools should be catalysts for growth and development. The alone and independent experiences from school are what can really help a child gain hands-on knowledge of the real world.