I can answer this. Being from a non-religious family, it was the latter. Peer groups.
I can’t speak for everywhere or every time, but in the 90s in my city, those groups were diverse in some dimensions (age, economic, political beliefs, homeschooling method, schooling exposure, weird parents) and un-diverse in some dimensions (race, immigrants and 1st generation children of immigrants).
It’s important to note that I don’t think every school would get a checkmark on all of those boxes either. But where it differs the most would probably be numbers. Small schools exist in rural settings, but a peer group of 40 kids only about 5-10 of similar age to you is pretty different from most people’s school experience.
Swim lessons, camp, girl guides, soccer, art class, music lessons, part time jobs, church, etc etc etc etc etc. are you really so unimaginative as to believe that only school provides access to non-family members? Give your head a shake.
Swim lessons? Get out of here. Church? I did imagine that. Try reading.
And anyway, schooled kids do all of those things as well. Where's the advantage?
There's a reason I don't consider those activities when talking about school socialization. All of the activities you mentioned are part-time and/or self-selected. School is full-time and you don't get to choose your kids' peers. You can't pull them out easily if you don't like the other kids. Like the rest of the world, kids will need to learn how to deal with it, away from you, all day, every day. They will need to learn how to deal with bullies and spurned crushes and tribal politics and bad teachers and all the rest. And yes, that can be harsh. Yes, some kids will have a difficult time. Most will learn invaluable social skills about how to integrate themselves into society, and they will be practicing those social skills full-time at school.
Seriously dude, what’s the difference? What do you think “socialization” means? It is about being exposed to others, interacting with them, and learning social norms. Sitting quietly at desks listening to a teacher is objectively less effective than something like swimming lessons, or really anything I mentioned in my list, and that description describes the bulk of time at school.
Everything else you described makes me wonder why you think those things are essential to the human experience. Are you regularly bullied as an adult, because if so I suggest you make some life changes. Bad teachers are different from bad managers - you can’t easily quit and go elsewhere, or complain to HR.
Also, spurned crushes exist well beyond education for many people! Not sure why you suggest education is a key component of this.
> Where’s the advantage?
I am not saying there is an advantage in these elements. I am saying socialization is not a disadvantage to homeschoolers and this is really a myth.
> Swim lessons? Get out of here. Church? I did imagine that. Try reading.
I think we agree on this subject, but as a 3rd party in this back and forth I have to say that this is not appropriate discourse for this site. Please try to interpret others comments as charitably as possible. There is never a justification for saying something snarky and rude like "Get out of here" or "Try reading".
He’s the one who told me I was “unimaginative” and to “give my head a shake”. I just responded in kind. Don’t blame me for being a better asshole when he initiated that tone.
My contribution to civility here was to just stop responding.
> He’s the one who told me I was “unimaginative” and to “give my head a shake”. I just responded in kind. Don’t blame me for being a better a*hole when he initiated that tone.
Yes, you are not the only one using unkind words.
Still, most of the time, each of us (and therefore all of us as an online community) can do better. You have various options. It is tempting to fall into the attack/counter-attack posture. But instead of counter attacking, you can say something like "That was unkind" and leave it there.
> My contribution to civility here was to just stop responding.
A fair point. Doing so is preferable to adding fuel to the fire. Even better IMO is to reassert the community norms firmly without insulting the other person.
Where do state-schooled kids get their socialization? They are corralled into tightly age-bound groups, rarely befriending kids much older or younger than them. That's a very artificial and unnatural environment.
> Church? That's a bit like the pot calling the kettle black when it comes to social distortion.
Can't you say the same thing of parochial schools? Given the general success of parochial schools, I would find it difficult to imagine how one would argue against their model.
> an artificial environment designed to produce obedient factory workers.
Well, no, not exclusively designed for that -- or any one thing. There are many stakeholders and it is fairly difficult to use the word design. I'd suggest evolved might serve as a better metaphor.
(People cite historic factors connecting school to factory workers. I tend to agree, but probably only because people have told me this; I haven't read primary sources on this. Anyhow, I'll grant it for sake of argument.)
Schools in the USA, as I understand them, attempt (with widely divergent success) to prepare students for a mixture of futures: perhaps college, perhaps trade schools, and perhaps general background for citizenship.
I think you'll find that is not actually the case.
Also, I would argue that the distorted "society" produced by public schools is more harmful than beneficial.