Big Ideas,
Real Impact.
Most often asked questions by parents
Why do the Reason and Reality Group Curricula and Books begin at the middle school level?
Question:
Why do your curricula and books primarily target middle school, high school, and first- and second-year university students instead of younger children?
Response
Our educational materials are intentionally designed for students beginning in middle school because this is a period when many learners become increasingly capable of abstract reasoning, evaluating evidence, considering hypothetical situations, and analyzing competing ideas. While younger children are naturally curious and ask many questions about the world around them, adolescence is often the stage at which students can begin to engage systematically with logic, philosophy, ethics, and critical reasoning.
Why Not Begin Earlier?
This does not mean younger children lack curiosity or intellectual ability. On the contrary, early childhood is characterized by frequent questioning as children build their understanding of the world. Research in developmental psychology indicates that curiosity remains present throughout life. However, as students progress through school, a combination of increased academic demands, concern about peer perceptions, and emphasis on finding correct answers may reduce the frequency with which students openly question assumptions or explore alternative explanations.
Why Middle School Is an Appropriate Starting Point
Students are increasingly able to think abstractly and hypothetically.
They can evaluate arguments rather than simply memorize information.
They are better prepared to distinguish evidence from opinion.
They can discuss ethical, philosophical, and civic questions with greater depth.
They are developing lifelong habits of reasoning that will influence higher education, careers, and citizenship.
Educational Philosophy
The mission is not to teach students what to think, but to strengthen how they think. The curriculum encourages respectful questioning, logical analysis, intellectual humility, and evidence-based reasoning while allowing students to reach their own well-supported conclusions.
Research Context
Developmental psychologist Jean Piaget proposed that many students begin entering the formal operational stage at approximately 11–12 years of age, during which abstract and hypothetical reasoning becomes increasingly possible. Modern research recognizes that development varies among individuals, but many educators continue to regard early adolescence as an appropriate time to introduce more structured instruction in critical thinking and analytical reasoning.
Concise Response
Children never lose their curiosity. What often changes during adolescence is not their ability to ask questions, but how often they challenge accepted answers or publicly express uncertainty. Our curriculum is designed to help students strengthen and preserve that habit of thoughtful inquiry at the stage when they are developmentally ready for deeper reasoning. We do not seek to teach students what to think; we seek to help them become better thinkers.
Selected References
Piaget, J. (1952). The Origins of Intelligence in Children.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2018). How People Learn II: Learners, Contexts, and Cultures.
American Psychological Association. Educational and developmental psychology resources.
A Note on Public Schools and Homeschooling
As I write increasingly about homeschooling and the importance of critical-thinking and reasoning skills for middle school, high school, and university students, I want to make one point very clear: supporting many of the objectives of homeschooling does not require opposition to public education. I am not against public schools. Public schools have educated generations of Americans, employ many dedicated teachers and administrators, and remain an essential part of our educational system. At the same time, acknowledging their importance should not prevent us from examining their shortcomings or asking how education can be improved.
I have spoken with many parents who have removed their children from public schools and chosen homeschooling. Their reasons vary considerably. Some have experienced serious problems firsthand, while others have been influenced by concerns they encountered through social media, conversations with other parents, or broader dissatisfaction with public education. In my own conversations, relatively few parents have described specific educational experiences that, by themselves, clearly demonstrated that withdrawing their child was the only reasonable option. That is an observation from my personal experience, not a statistical conclusion, and it should be understood as such.
None of this means that serious problems within public education should be dismissed. They should not. Parents have legitimate reason for concern whenever matters unrelated to a school's fundamental educational responsibilities begin displacing the time and attention necessary for students to become competent readers, writers, mathematical thinkers, and reasoners. Schools inevitably operate within a society containing different values, philosophies, and viewpoints. The responsibility of educators, however, should be to help students learn how to examine ideas, evidence, and arguments rather than simply telling them what conclusions they ought to reach.
This is also where homeschooling and public education need not be viewed as opposing camps. Both can benefit from a renewed emphasis on critical thinking and reasoning. My concern is not primarily where a student is educated, but what kind of intellectual development that student receives. Whether a young person attends a public school, private school, homeschool, or eventually a university, the objective should remain much the same: provide a strong foundation in the essential academic disciplines while teaching students how to question carefully, evaluate evidence, recognize faulty reasoning, consider competing explanations, and reach conclusions they can rationally defend.
The educational question, therefore, should not simply be, “Public school or homeschool?” A more important question is: Are we teaching young people what they need to know while also teaching them how to think?
L.R.Caldwell