Reasons for neglect of homeschooling in educational research literature are explored. The ideological hostility that occasionally surfaces in policy debates is unlikely to have a major influence on mainstream researchers. An alternative explanation based on Kuhn's concept of normal science is proposed. The dominant paradigm of educational research emphasizes quantitative analyses, standardized settings, and large randomized samples. Unlike homeschooling, public schools, with their state-mandated curricula, age-graded classrooms, and tight regulation of facilities and personnel, provide an ideal setting for this paradigm. The congruence between setting and method is reinforced by universities. The training of licensed public school teachers generates most of the revenue that supports faculty positions in colleges of education. Consequently there is little incentive to study homeschooling. The article concludes that a scientific revolution in educational research is not in prospect. Moving beyond the current neglect will require a change in approach in investigating homeschooling. Rather than focusing on holistic comparisons, aimed at demonstrating the superiority of one educational mode over another, homeschool researchers can gain mainstream attention by investigating factors that affect motivation and learning across educational contexts, thereby generating results that would be useful to both public school teachers and home educators.