Why Don’t We Value Home Economics?
As someone who has chosen to commit myself to teaching home economics to youth, it can sometimes surprise me how little others value its potential. Granted, part of the reason I think Home Economics is undervalued is because it can seem like so much fun. We struggle to get students to see the fun in science and math, while ignoring the subjects and activities that are already incorporating science and math. We see these subjects as trivial. Perhaps it is difficult for people to appreciate just how much home economics can bring to the lives of students because it is at once so practical, and yet so holistic and broad. We don’t see everything it touches because it has so long been relegated to being ‘just’ in the home.
Furthermore, as such, it has been historically undervalued as women’s and domestic work. As women struggle to gain power and respect within formal economies, part of that struggle has often involved rejecting women’s traditional prescribed social roles and work. The continued stigma surrounding home economics perpetuates – painting its gifts as trivial, unintelligent, and monetarily worthless. For women, pursuing and taking pride in home economics can even be seen as participating in and perpetuating their own oppression. However, I see this primarily as a problem of home economics continuing to go unrecognized as the contextualizing, critical, intelligent, creatively scientific, fulfilling discipline that it has the great potential to be.
Educational Ideals
To see how home economics can contribute to education, we must first examine our purpose and goals of education in general. A tactic often used to clarify our beliefs as to the purpose of education and our goals as educators is to imagine an ‘ideal educated person’. What are the greater goals we are striving toward with and for our students (Thomas & Smith, 1994, p.20)?
One approach I particularly appreciate is Osborne’s avocation for liberal education that “entails introducing students to the never-ending conversation about what it means to be human and to live together with other human beings on a finite planet” (p.33). I like that Osborne’s goal prioritizes collaboration, respect for the earth’s limited resources, and the on-going nature of learning. I also appreciate that his overall approach focuses on expanding the horizons of student’s thinking and ability to critically engage. I believe it is in every student’s best interest to be prepared for engagement in the social world, with appreciation for the physical world.
For most, the purpose of education also includes, at least partly, a preparation for productive membership in the economy. Even schooling that is not classified as vocational training has some goal of promoting career success for its students. One of the major challenges of education on this front is predicting what knowledge and skills will be necessary for students by the time they are graduating and ready to enter the work force (Osborne, 2008). With rapidly changing economies and work forces, we can’t know what the world of work will look like in twenty years. I believe our best bet is to prepare students for life-long critical engagement and learning. I also believe that a focus on social-emotional health, besides being of great inherent value to students, can translate into greater career success. Of course, one person’s career success may not look like another’s. The best we can do is open student’s eyes to the possibilities and prepare them to pursue their passions. We may not be able to teach the skills they will need to do so, but we may be able to teach in a way where students learn how to learn, and have confidence in their ability to learn.
For students to feel like they can be successful they must have the skills to become so, but they also must know that they have that ability. I want youth to be confident in themselves, their worth, and their ability to navigate their future lives. Furthermore, I believe that healthy self-worth goes hand in hand with seeing the worth of all people. My personal educational goal is one that fosters student’s confidence in themselves and their ability to discover and pursue their passions with compassion for and collaboration with others. I believe that pursuit of such a goal is in everyone’s best interest.
An Integrative Approach
It can be difficult to pin down how Home Economics fits directly into each separate educational goal and associated discipline. As Vaines points out, the ‘integrative core’ of Home Economics is the family, but the ‘environment’ or ‘organic whole’ of Home Economics is wide and far-reaching (1997, p.4-5). Vaines states that Home Economics is primarily “a multi-disciplinary field of study and practice concerned with improving individual and family well-being and with strengthening and empowering families through both formal and non-formal education” (1997, p.4).
Home Economics is concerned with the home, but how we define the ‘home’, and what we see as relevant to the home is broad, holistic, and interconnected. Families tend to have many similar practical concerns, such as food, health, clothing, shelter, nurturing relationships, parenthood, and negotiating the world of work (Smith & de Zwart, 2010, p.17-18; Thomas & Smith, 1994, p.22). In this way, families face similar problems. However, each family is unique in makeup and position within larger social context. Families have a variety of makeup, socio-historical context, placements in larger power structures, values, beliefs, and environments. While Home Economics is concerned with the home, it attempts to connect and contextualize family struggles within larger social issues such as sexism, racism, classism, homophobia, and other forms of structural, institutionalized violence (Thomas & Smith, 1994, p.22).
Because of this approach, Home Economics deals with the exploration and implementation, and navigation of a wide variety of disciplines – both practically and abstractly. Home Economics deals with basic personal care, reflective and creative problem solving, and greater social and environmental responsibility. It pulls from theory of every discipline to provide integrated, holistic support for families at every level within the greater social context.
Self-Care
At the most apparent and basic level, Home Economics provides students with daily life skills. It takes a holistic approach to personal care and provides the skills for students to critically and successfully engage in meeting their goals for home life. Home Economics classes provide knowledge and skills in nutrition, hygiene, health, grooming, home safety, financial literacy, communication, problem-solving, and personal behavior and stress-management (Ross, 2005; Smith & de Zwart, 2010, p.16-18; Thomas & Smith, 1994, p.22; Werhan, Bucklan & Vollmer, 2004, p.44&51). It develops skills such as motor functioning and reading for understanding as well as providing practice applying abstract, theoretical, scientific concepts such as math and chemistry (Ross, 2005; Werhan, Bucklan & Vollmer, 2004, p.51).
Furthermore, many students see Home Economics classes as a retreat. For many, it is one of the few places in school where they can feel a sense of belonging, community, and accomplishment. Werhan, Bucklan and Vollmer state that for students, Home Economics can even be an “alternate form of psychotherapy which helps build a sense of community as students work and share their personal stories” (2004, p.44). Students who struggle with other subjects’ purely abstract and theoretical nature, focus on written assessment, and academic approach may respond to the tangible, practical nature of Home Economics and have opportunities to excel while exercising their creativity and intelligence. Home Economics is a medium where students can see tangible evidence of their successes, which builds confidence.
Vocational Training and Problem Based Learning
While Home Economics has shifted away from being formally linked with preparation for a specific vocation, it still has enormous potential to prepare students for navigating future work lives. While perhaps not addressing the primary purposes of particular vocations, its lessons are useful and adaptable to a variety of work situations. Thomas and Smith state: “home economics has considerable potential for fulfilling general educational purposes and not exclusively vocational educational purposes. In this regard, its unique concern for addressing the challenges of everyday life in the private sphere of family is particularly relevant” (1994, p.24). Home Economics fosters communication, understanding multiple perspectives, and the ability to function effectively in relationships (Thomas & Smith, 1994, p.22). Smith and de Zwart further point out that strengthening families and their communication leads to less work problems (2010, p.19).
The true value of Home Economics is often not in the skills themselves, but rather how the learning of those skills teaches problem solving and self-directed learning. Home Economics curriculums employ project-based learning which require students to pull from theoretical abstraction to apply practical reasoning, use reflective decision-making, and often to communicate effectively with others (Thomas & Smith, 1994, p.21; Werhan, Bucklan, & Vollmer, 2004, p.46). Ross notes that Home Economics classes such as sewing cultivate creativity, which, when combined with the self-esteem described earlier, builds skills in problem solving and perseverance (2005). This is further supported by Werhan, Bucklan, & Vollmer who note that students in Home Economics show an increased “willingness to try a variety of methods until problems [are] solved” (2004, p.46). While not particular to a vocation, these skills are valuable to all vocations. Furthermore, as Werhan, Bucklan, & Vollmer point out: “human intelligence occurs in a variety of ways that are not subject to conventional testing” (2004, p.46). Home Economics not only allows students to explore and develop these multiple intelligences, but allows educators to teach and recognize students in a greater variety of ways.
Social Responsibility
Finally, Home Economics promotes an ethic of social justice and responsibility. The integrative nature of Home Economics involves critiquing and challenging all forces that act on the family. As Vaines points out, it engages students in critiquing and challenging “those social institutions which are the source of concerns or difficulties in the family and which are obstacles to autonomous thought and autonomous action” (1997, p.6). This is key to achieving ideals of education, which emphasize democracy, and responsibilities of citizenship.
Furthermore, Home Economics explores how “leading a meaningful and purposeful life requires individuals, families and communities to examine the ways in which we live and work together creating our common good” (Vaines, 1997, p.4). A Home Economics approach “listens to and knows that there are a variety of voices and perspectives within families and among families and includes those that are marginalized and excluded” (Thomas & Smith, 1994, p. 23). Such a perspective develops ideals of social justice such as moral consciousness, genuine concern for others, an examination of the root causes of inequality, and an ethic of caring which includes commitment to nurturing a sense of community (Thomas & Smith, 1994, p.22). This is further facilitated by factors discussed previously. I believe that developing self-esteem contributes to seeing the value in all life and allows individuals to see how they have the power to better their world. Furthermore, building critiquing, problem-solving, and communication skills empowers them to enact their ethics.
Conclusion
Describing and defending Home Economics can be difficult because of the very aspects that make it valuable. The value of Home Economics lies in how it ‘sneaks’ in incredibly important skills and lessons into tasks that seem like merely hobbies. The integrative approach further makes it difficult to pin down the specific goals and benefits of such an approach. Home Economics involves developing positive atmosphere, self-esteem, connectivity, and an ethic of caring – all difficult to define, test, or measure. It is not a subject that can be evaluated quantitatively. Furthermore, Home Economics looks different with every teacher, in every classroom. However, this again shows the adaptability of Home Economics to address specific and varying talents of teachers, needs of students, and school environments. We need to remember that however quantitatively inconsistent, however difficult to pin down its contributions, Home Economics continues to be a powerful discipline and way of thinking that has enormous potential to help students achieve their best educational experiences and goals.
References:
Montgomery, B. (2006). Redefining Sewing as an Educational Experience in Middle and High Schools. Journal of Family and Consumer Science, 98(1), 47-52. Available at: http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/404534/redefining_sewing_as_an_educational_experience_in_middle_and_high/index.html
Osborne, K. (2008). Education and Schooling: A Relationship That Can Never be Taken for Granted. In D. Coulter & J.R. Wiens (Eds.), Why Do We Educate? Renewing the Conversation (vol. 1, pp. 21-41). Boston: Blackwell. (Chapter 2) Access at: http://site.ebrary.com/lib/ubc/docDetail.action?docID=10297982&p00=why%20educae%3F%20renewing%20conversation
Rohan, L. (2006). A Material Pedagogy: Lessons from Early-Twentieth-Century Domestic Arts Curricula, Pedagogy: Critical Approaches to Teaching Literature, Language, Composition, and Culture, 6(1), 79–101.
Ross, A. (2005). Teaching Kids to Sew. American Profile. Available at: (Ross, 2005)http://americanprofile.com/articles/teaching-kids-to-sew/
Smith, M.G. & de Zwart, M.L. (2010). Home Economics: A Contextual Study of the Subject and Home Economics Teacher Education. Teacher Inquirer, May, 2010. Access at: http://bctf.ca/publications/TeacherInquirer.aspx?id=14468
Thomas, J. & Smith, G. (1994). Toward an Ideal of the Person Educated in Home Economics: An Invitation to Dialogue. Canadian Home Economics Journal, 44(1), 20- 25.
Vaines, E. (1997). Re-visiting Reflective Practice. In E. Vaines, D. Badir & D. Kieren (Eds.), People and Practice: International Issues for Home Economists, 5(3).
Werhan, Carol R., Bucklan, Sandra S. & Vollmer, J. (2004). Finding A Place For Tradition In The Curriculum: A Case Study For Sewing In The Ohio Family And Consumer Sciences Classroom. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences Education, 22(1), 43-56.