California says "No" to homeschooling

The interesting question to me in this story is constitutional issues. For example, private schools frequently have uncreditaled teachers. Does this mean they will have to use creditialed teachers only? Or perhaps having one creditialed teacher at the school is enough?

 

>>

That is a valid question, because "education for all" is a very muddy issue. Teacher credential requirements are state by state, funding is a state and federal issue, school classes are not defined, and public school is an "option" not a standard. One system with single uniform requirements is simple- but simple doesn't mean the solution best serves everyone. It hurts my brain to think about how a uniform school system would best meet the needs of everyone in our country...I just can't see any possible scenario when that would be true. Requiring our citizens to receive an education necessitates us offering a free one- but I heartily believe that teacher credentials are not the crux of the problem. We have highly qualified teachers graduating children who can't read, and lay parents graduating children who can- so we can't deduce that it's the teacher's education that guarantees success. It's probably a lack of system wide competition, because competition would allow the entire industry to self-correct. (Invisible hand) I would love to see government get out of the education business all together.

 

Easy target. Complex issue.

With all respect to your strict libertarian view, "the government" is not some faceless inhuman monolithic entity. Yes, it is not uncommon that when systems (of all shapes, sizes, and compositions) get too big, waste and inefficiency can grow.

But why are Wal-Mart, McDonalds, Coca-Cola, et al so popular? Could it be that these large organizations are able to produce a uniform product? These massive organizations are able to create a product that -- no matter where you obtain it -- has the same look, feel, and experience as anywhere else. Yes, of course, your Big Mac is not 100% the same in Boston as in Berkeley (and they do allow for some modest adjustments to menus for local tastes) but you certainly are going to recognize it as a Big Mac.

One of the most often cited reasons for the lagging abilities of American students as compared to those in other countries is not because education is government run, but because, in the US, too many governments are running it. A student in Tacoma, is not going to learn what a student in Topeka is learning, and their curriculum is different than Tampa. You want us to obliterate the entire public school system at a time when US students are losing their ability to compete on the world stage against students from countries with strong national standards and replace it with an even more free-wheeling hodgepodge of curricula, abilities, and standards?

If I can get a burger that looks pretty much the same anywhere in the country, why can't we graduate high schoolers who have pretty much the same abilities?

And before you get all reflexive, I most certainly recognize we are talking about living, breathing, unique children -- not hamburgers. However, that is also a reality that many of the "get government out of education" advocates conveniently ignore. There are going to be some students who just cannot rise to the prevailing standard -- national or not. And maybe those students would benefit from legitimate homeschooling. However, many (if not most) of those parents demand the public schools provide top-notch services, often to the detriment of the majority of student who do not need such specialized services.

Bottom line, your approach isn't perfect. Neither is public schooling. However, we most certainly get the most "bang for the buck" in a public education system than we ever could returning to one home, one school.

You want to to provide a personal, private, legitimate homeschool experience for your children. More power to you.
But please recognize, it is something not everyone can do.

And, please stop trashing public school systems, teachers, and students. There are issues to address and problems to solve, no question. But that does not mean the approach is inappropriate or the participants incompetent.

 

I agree that attacking either side is silly and unproductive. However, I would not say we get the best "bang for our buck" with public education. I am not questioning the ability, intent, or "vested" interests here, what I am saying is that as with any bureaucracy there is much waste. This is shown by the break down of costs per student that nearly every public school system provides.

The difference between the corporations that you mention and government run education (and more so with centralized option you have suggested) is the lack of competition. When one looks at this they can see the problem, vouchers(support them or not) provide a road for competition and public school systems and teachers hate the idea. If the public schools are really able to provide the same or better education than private schools then the voucher system would not be an area of contention. But it is.

You brought up foreign schools systems, I believe that in Germany a student is granted a per year allocation of funds and that student can use those at whatever school they wish to attend. This too would provide a good level of competition.

 

\

You want to to provide a personal, private, legitimate homeschool experience for your children. More power to you.
But please recognize, it is something not everyone can do.

And, please stop trashing public school systems, teachers, and students. There are issues to address and problems to solve, no question. But that does not mean the approach is inappropriate or the participants incompetent.[/QUOTE]

>>

Wow, you have me mixed up with someone else. But it's kinda fun being called Libertarian!

 

I'm unaware that private schools often have uncredentialed teachers, but nothing about K-12 education surprises me any more. Private schools are required by law here in California to employ credentialed teachers (with some exceptions I guess) but the law might not be widely enforced.

So what Constitutional issues does this matter of teacher credentialling raise? How is it different than other forms of professional licensing? It's probably less Constitutionally questionable than the general degree-use laws that some states are enacting.

I agree that interpreting the credentialling requirement might be difficult. In the case of homeschooling, could a credentialled teacher oversee a group of remote students by distance-learning, while the children's parents serve as on-site teaching assistants? That might be the basis of a good compromise.

 

While they might not be the crux of whatever the problem is, I do think that teacher qualifications are a basic component of a sound educational system.

"Guarantees" it, no. But it certainly makes it more likely.

I can't accept that teacher's education is irrelevant to educational effectiveness or that parents, simply because they are parents, are equal or better educators than credentialed teachers.

What would the results be if the public school system didn't exist and parents had responsibility for educating their own children at home? I think that countless children would grow up completely illiterate and a majority of kids would come away with only rudimentary educations.

The issue here is the fact that the public school system is a universal education system. It attempts to educate all of society's children. That means that it has to cope with all of the social problems that those children bring with them to school. Broken disfunctional homes. Drug and substance abuse. Millions upon millions of kids who don't even speak English.

The public schools do pretty well, given the intractable material that they have to work with. Homeschooling would almost certainly be a complete and abject failure if it was extended to all children the same way that public schooling is.

Concluding from the public schools' struggles that teacher qualifications are irrelevant to student success seems to be a total (and dangerous) non-sequitur.

I think that qualified teachers will almost always get better results than amateurs would, given comparable student populations. Trained teachers will certainly get more out of the kids from the projects and the barrios than their parents would. And generally speaking, trained teachers will also provide gifted students superior one-on-one tutoring as well.

 

And we begin down the slippery slope

Ah, Steve, public schools already to charge tuition, it's called property taxes.
And yes, if we removed the cost of public schools from the tax base -- at which point I guess we couldn't call them "public" schools anymore -- that would lower taxes.

So, should I also then be able to subtract the cost of police and fire protection? You see the next town over has a much better equipped police and fire departments, so I'll pay them to come to my house if needed.

Oh, and the water in the next county is much cleaner. Can I pay to have that piped into my house?

And since funding the public schools has become a "parent only tax," I'm going to withhold taxes used for the senior center, subsidized housing, meals on wheels, parks and recreation because I don't use any of these services.

Next, I'll explain why I should have no FEDERAL tax obligation either!

If you really want to live "off the grid" go find a private island some place and pay for every single service you utilize, out of pocket.

Sometimes we just have to contribute to the commonwealth. E pluribus unum -- out of many, one. United we stand, divided we fall.

These ring a bell?

 

Nope, been following your comments

Sorry, but re-read your own posts ... your messianic support of homeschooling while simultaneously trashing public schooling has been pretty clearly articulated.

And it's "kinda fun" to be called a Libertarian?
You espouse their views, but think being aligned with them is a joke?

 

>>
Ok, here's the thing...I don't really have the energy to keep going back over things that were covered days ago...copy and paste...copy and paste...re-explaining things, providing definitions....yawn. So, I'm happy to step out of your way.

 

And therein is the problem

Wanna know a secret, cook? I'm pretty tired of this too.
But precisely because of "copy and paste ... copy and paste."
No substantive responses ... just regurgitating the same talking points.

See, that's what discussion is for, exploring other's views, keeping one's mind open to new ideas.

I'm happy for you to step out of the way too, but therein lies the problem ... people "walk off" virtually unchanged by the experience except, often, to feel even more "persecuted" because someone had the audacity to even suggest there are alternatives to their unchallenged ideals.

Best of luck.

 

CA Court update

Court of Appeal Grants Petition for Re-hearing
Sent out by HSLDA today:


On March 25, the California Court of Appeal granted a motion for
rehearing in the 'In re Rachel L.' case--the controversial decision
which purported to ban all homeschooling in that state unless the
parents held a teaching license qualifying them to teach in public
schools.

The automatic effect of granting this motion is that the prior opinion
is vacated and is no longer binding on any one, including the parties
in the case.

The Court of Appeal has solicited a number of public school
establishment organizations to submit amicus briefs including the
California Superintendent of Public Instruction, California Department
of Education, the Los Angeles Unified School District, and three
California teacher unions. The court also granted permission to
Sunland Christian School to file an amicus brief. The order also
indicates that it will consider amicus applications from other groups.


Home School Legal Defense Association will seek permission to file
such an amicus brief and will coordinate efforts with a number of
organizations interesting in filing briefs to support the right of
parents to homeschool their children in California.

"This is a great first step," said Michael Farris, chairman of HSLDA.
"We are very glad that this case will be reheard and that this opinion
has been vacated, but there is no guarantee as to what the ultimate
outcome will be. This case remains our top priority," he added.

 

If you practice medicine without a license, you're in trouble.
If you practice dentistry without a license, you're in trouble.
If you operate on a dog without a vet's license, you're in trouble.
If you fly a plane without a license, you're in trouble.


But if you insist on teaching your kids without a license, you're okay?

Please don't say it's because they're your own kids. My wife is a family nurse practitioner. If I need a prescription for medicine--something within her scope of practice--she insists I get the prescription from another provider--even though she is licensed to practice. It's a conflict of interest.

Choosing to refuse your children an education from licensed practitioners (teachers) is reprehensible enough. Deciding further to substitute for them when you don't have the requisite training, skill, experience, credentials, or licensure, should be criminal.

If you sell real estate without a license, you're in trouble.
If you practice law without a license....

 

>>


The license is required to charge a fee for those services and use the professional title in your business. It regulates and protects consumers against fraud- apples and oranges to this discussion. None of us who support homeschooling are suggesting that a homeschool parent has the ability or legal protection to educate other people's children, let alone charge them for doing so or operate a business.

Also, why not say it is different when it's your own kids? It is different. Teaching one's own child isn't criminal. (neither is planning their meals without a Registered Dietitian credential) At last check, you don't need any type of credential to be a parent.

 

If you feed your kindergartener a steady diet of Twinkies, ice cream, cheese cake and Coca-Cola, you're going to land in the gunsights of your state child protection agency very quickly. Parents do not have the absolute right to raise their children free of government involvement.

There probably should be such a credential....it would prevent many heart-breaking tragedies.

 

Ouch! What happens if you're so po' that that's the only food you can afford to buy?

 

Well, if the student was in public school, he or she could get free breakfast and lunch...

 

>>

Wow....we ARE in America right?

 

Between WIC and the modern-day equivalent of food stamps, there's no reason other than apathy, laziness or stupidity to feed kids like that.

Yes....where you're free to make bad decisions for yourself, not your children.