Court limits home-schooling to credentialed teachers

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

LOS ANGELES -- A state appeals court has struck a blow against the home-schooling movement, ruling that California law requires parents to send their children to full-time schools or have them taught by credentialed tutors at home.

The ruling was issued by the Second District Court of Appeal in a dispute between the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services and Phillip and Mary Long of Lynwood, who have been home-schooling their eight children. Mary Long, who has no state credential, acts as their teacher.

The Longs said they have also enrolled their children in Sunland Christian School, a private religious academy, which considers them part of its independent study program and visits the home about four times a year. A juvenile court judge looking into one child's complaint of mistreatment by Phillip Long found that the children were being poorly educated but refused to order two of the children, ages 7 and 9, to be enrolled in a full-time school, saying parents have a right to educate their children at home.

But the appeals court said state law has been clear since at least 1953, when another appellate court rejected a challenge by home-schooling parents to California's compulsory education statutes. Those statutes require children between 6 and 18 to attend a full-time day school, either public or private, or to be instructed by a tutor who holds a state credential for the child's grade level.

"California courts have held that ... parents do not have a constitutional right to home-school their children," Justice H. Walter Croskey said in the 3-0 ruling, issued Feb. 28. "Parents have a legal duty to see to their children's schooling under the provisions of these laws."

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/0...

if someone wants home school their kids, their should get one.

What on earth would the point be of requiring a parent to get training that relates primarily to managing thirty kids of the same age group, when parents don't do that and they already have better results with their methods?

require homeschool teachers to pass basic competency tests.

of course, we would have to require those tests of "real" teachers. and every teachers union i know of has fought those tooth and nail

i do know that statistically speaking, homeschooled kids do better on average in objective measures of educational achievement than public schools do (and yes, i realize the sample groups aren't t he same, but i see no evidence there is a problem in this area)

from the NYT:

North Carolina's largest teachers' organization filed suit on Friday against the state school board, seeking to block a competency examination for teachers at the state's poorest-performing schools.

About 240 teachers at 15 schools across the state are scheduled to take the test on June 12. The teachers were singled out because students at their schools scored lowest on year-end standardized tests.

The lawsuit, a class action filed in Gaston County, west of Charlotte, says that low test scores are more a function of poverty than teacher performance and that requiring the teachers to take the competency test violates their constitutional rights.

Every time we get a home schooled kid transferring into my high school we find that he or she is behind in many ares. One of the worst things they have to deal with is a complete lack of social intellect or ability to work with other kids.

I've seen that in science they are usually a major disaster, way behind an average kid for that grade.

Having said all that, I think I am against this. If by law a child must receive an education I still believe it is the parents right to determine how their own child is educated.

does not match with the data.

overwhelmingly, homeschooled kids are overrepresented in national spelling bee, geography bee championships and overrepresented in standardized test scores.

these are at least somewhat objective measures, since we can't compare grades, obviously, which are highly subjective

note that 30-37 percentile points on all subjects is simply ASTOUNDING outperformance.

http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000010/200410250.asp

1. In 1997, a study of 5,402 homeschool students from 1,657 families was released. It was entitled, "Strengths of Their Own: Home Schoolers Across America." The study demonstrated that homeschoolers, on the average, out-performed their counterparts in the public schools by 30 to 37 percentile points in all subjects. A significant finding when analyzing the data for 8th graders was the evidence that homeschoolers who are homeschooled two or more years score substantially higher than students who have been homeschooled one year or less. The new homeschoolers were scoring on the average in the 59th percentile compared to students homeschooled the last two or more years who scored between 86th and 92nd percentile. i


This was confirmed in another study by Dr. Lawrence Rudner of 20,760 homeschooled students which found the homeschoolers who have homeschooled all their school aged years had the highest academic achievement. This was especially apparent in the higher grades. ii This is a good encouragement to families catch the long-range vision and homeschool through high school.


Another important finding of Strengths of Their Own was that the race of the student does not make any difference. There was no significant difference between minority and white homeschooled students. For example, in grades K-12, both white and minority students scored, on the average, in the 87th percentile. In math, whites scored in the 82nd percentile while minorities scored in the 77th percentile. In the public schools, however, there is a sharp contrast. White public school eighth grade students, nationally scored the 58th percentile in math and the 57th percentile in reading. Black eighth grade students, on the other hand, scored on the average at the 24th percentile in math and the 28th percentile in reading. Hispanics scored at the 29th percentile in math and the 28th percentile in reading. iii

Don't go to a petroleum company website to find a study that shows global warming isn't happening.

I've not met one in one-thousand parents who understand a clue about high-school biology, physics, chemistry. We have teachers teaching only chemistry in high school with 50 hours in chemistry who can't teach anything else because it is too hard to master at the high school level.

Same with math: all high school students must have had Algebra 1, Geometry, Trigonometry, and Algebra 2, and many push though to their first level of Calc.

GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK. There is no way one parent can master English, English literature, Chemisty, Math, Physics, History, at the level needed to teach kids.

It may work in third grade, but the further along you go the more it becomes LITERALLY impossible for any one person to master the subjects needed across the board to give a complete education at the high school level.

In my state (not a great educational hot spot: Texas) one must have a minimum of 24 hours in a subject at the university level to teach the topic at the high school level--and then one must pass a fairly rigorous content exam on that topic.

You can show me any study you want, unless you are one hell of a brilliant parent you will never master each of these topics at a level that is needed to teach it at a high school level.

But I do know that my homeschooled, extremely bright, politically aware and very liberal 15 year old cousin does a lot of his classes at the community college right now. He had the option of going to regular high school, and is some ways that would have been good, he could have done AP or International Baccalaureate, but he hates the social pecking order and the fake machismo that his peer group would require of him. He is a very nice kid. He plays in a rock band, has a girl friend, all the other regular teenage boy stuff.

Some parents use online classes for their kids. Here is one option, through Stanford University. http://epgy.stanford.edu /

Other find mentors or internships for their older kids. In some states there are homeschool co-ops where you can sign your kid up for individual classes without taking a full time load. I doubt many parents of older homeschooled students are actually teaching the entire course load themselves.

MANY MANY STUDIES.

that's why i provided the link

i prefer evidence to feeling, and anecdotal data, especially with a small sample size

For the most part successful homeschoolers are going to keep homeschooling.

A lot of kids get pulled out of public school to homeschool and need significant remedial work. That doesn't mean public school doesn't work, either. Only that the kids who switch methods are likely to be the ones who needed a different approach.

Read a study, Mr. Science. Homeschooled kids do better. Not that I think we should outlaw schools, of course. Parents have the right to decide what works for their family.

http://www.fraserinstitute.org/commerce.web/newsrelease...

http://www.nheri.org/content/view/199 /

http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000010/200410250.asp

socialization can be a real problem...

Frasier, I'm surprised you haven't realized, (were you perhaps homeschooled?) is not neutral. They are clearly right wing.

Good God. They have "personal responsibility," "reduced taxation" and "prosperity" flashing on top of their website. You think there is ANY possibility these guys are going to find merit in public over private solutions?

Tell me you're being sarcastic here.

that's something that's consistent with all people with an agenda

study after study after study confirms that homeschooled kids do better.

even if they didn't, it should STILL be a matter of parental rights, but the reality is they do better

heck, several studies show ZERO gap between kids of different races among homeschooled, whereas there are obvious gaps in public school educated kids.

that's a major accomplishment.

i think much of the (unfounded) dislike of homeschoolers is that 1) a fair percentage happen to be strongly religious, or even fundamentalist 2) blind fealty to teacher's unions.

It ain't all it is cracked up to be. My child failed in his Spanish class because I was not knowledgeable in the subject. Also the science labs we created were quite insufficient compared to those in a regular school setting. Also science requires comparisons which we were unable to have because of time constraints. It takes a special person to be competent in every subject a child needs. Most if not all parents do not have those skills. That is why in a normal school setting a chilc has many different teachers for different subjects.

The "one's" I have met? It is the "parents" right? I could go on with your other posts, but you get the point.

Unfortunately, people who have had a poor education usually don't realize it. I don't see the wisdom in cutting off any alternative option for education as long as people are trapped in schools that don't work.

In fact, in spite of what I said I am against this court ruling and do not think it is right, even if it might be in the interest of a child.

I'll grant you that when I post via email I am careless with grammar and spelling but this is because I am in a hurry. I was in the 92nd percentile on my GRE and have a 3.7 in my Master's. But I didn't believe that such was the purpose of posts in a user's group.

I have had enough education to pay attention to who has funded a study before I suspend disbelief however. All of the studies posted so far have without a doubt been biased.

It sounds nice to say that parents have the freedom to choose how their children are educated. But the children have rights also. And they have a right to a good education. If we allowed parents to decide how their children get educated, then many would not send their children to school at all, or rather let them skip school. As an educator you should be fully aware of how hard it is to get some parents to send their children to school.

schooled kids and all of them excel. My best friend homeschooled all three of her kids (she had a hs education) and all three went to college on scholarships.

just like other professions that require competency exams to demonstarte they are QUALIFIED.

And vouchers are CRUD.

And it IS about the children .... right?

As a credentialled teacher, I had to go through a lot in order to qualify to teach. I had to show content area competence, knowledge of accepted teaching practices, and an understanding of the ways in which people learn.

I'm also required to continue professional development in order to renew my credential.

It bothers me that so many children are being taught by non-credentialled people, whether those people are their parents, or someone in a private/charter school.

If federal and state laws require credentialling for people who are teaching in a public school, why should it be different for poeple who have a biolobical or marriage link to the child?

that notion flies in the face of the law, which the appellate court spelled out very clearly, so it's a lost cause in California. If you're like the Longs, perhaps you can find a state where that isn't the law.

Number2: your claim of "better outcomes" and "better results" could, of course, mean whatever you or the Longs want it to mean. That doesn't mean they will ever do well at all in college or in life.

The outcome I am looking for is students being able to fully participate politically, socially and economically regardless of the circumstance of their birth so that their is greater equality of opportunity. To instill basic skills (reading, writing, math) and prepair them to be involved citizens (history, the uses and misuses of formal logic, psychology, comparative religion, etc).

The problem with home schooling is that its less likely make kids into citizens. They are less likely to get contact with people who are different from them. Additionally, if the parents are dominists they have more opportunities to produce brain-washed clones of themselves.

The court has the right idea.

I know a LOT of homeschooled kids who are very active in politics - democratic, Green, Libertarian, and even a few republicans. Homeschoolers have to be active in politics or the mommy-staters out there will round them up and send them off to die of boredom at school with all of the other kids.

As to your dominionist remark, there are plenty of them in PS as well. Ever been to Kansas or Alabama?

and alternative types of people. That's one of the functions of school -- socialization.

How do you know that they will be less likely to get contact with people who are different from them? In my city, the schools are in the process of re-segregating due to the decision to stop busing and then the subsequent Supreme Court ruling. So depending on what part of town you live in, it is very likely that your child will only have contact with others who are "like" them during their school day.

Many of the homeschool parents I know make a point of doing community service with their kids. The kids learn good citizenship and are exposed to a variety of people; different ages, economic circumstances, you name it. Many of the homeschool groups are quite diverse, too. If you want your kids to experience diversity, they will and if you don't, they won't. This is true for both traditional schooling families and homeschoolers.

Mayeb in your crazy part of the country, homeschooling works great, but here in my neck of the woods, homeschooled children consistently have lower ACT scores, lower college attendence, and they tend to be indoctrinated in some sort of radical christianity. Homeschooling is a bad thing. It is not good for children for them the be isolated from their peers and it opens them to ridicule. Also, there is no way in hell that the average home-"teacher" has the same level of knowledge that a college trained and state licensed teacher has. Children must be around other children (and god forbid, allowed to get into squabbles and chilhood fights) so that they can develop into effective and well adjusted people. Home school children too often are outcasts once they enter the real school system, be it in HS or college.

Educational options are vital for our children to grow and thrive as individuals.

Homeschooling does not isolate children from their peers; but it can expose them to situations where they learn to work with kids of varying ages, races, religious backgrounds, and scholastic ability levels.

Homeschooling does not open kids to ridicule any more than being "different" in a classroom of "normal" kids does.

Homeschooled kids are not all the spawn of religious wackos.

There are programs available for homeschoolers that have been in use for over a century by foreign service workers and military families who do not have access to facilities that can meet their children's educational needs. These programs are sometimes used in private schools by accredited teachers.

There are so many myths that are spouted out about homeschooling by inflexible people who refuse to acknowledge any point of view other than what's been sold to them by the powers that be. Interestingly, when my older boy went to public high school, his geometry teacher asked me which program we had used; because she was considering homeschooling her children, and was impressed with my son's grasp of the subject matter as well as his ability to articulate himself. I am neither licensed nor accredited.

Was she going to quit her job? How do parents who work fulltime homeschool? I have never understood that.

I'm a freelance musician, and my husband and I are able to arrange our schedules to accomodate our son's educational/recreational needs. There is generally less classroom time spent homeschooling than there is in public school, though arranging social and recreational activities can be more time-consuming, since we often need to drive somewhere to participate. I'll sometimes bring my son with me to rehearsals, where he can read or study.

I had to look stuff up off online because I just moved and half of my books are still in boxes, but here's somebody's site with a good long list of links to formal academic studies of outcomes and other quality data related to homeschooling. http://www.geocities.com/nelstomlinson/research.bibliog...

As for socialization, I think part of the problem is that the socialization in public schooling is very artificial. Outside of that enviornment, where will a person ever interact with 30 peers of their same age, from their same neighborhood, likely all of similar economic status and often ethnicity, while generally working on the same task? Homeschooled kids interact with other children in a wider range of ages, across backgrounds and get much more adult interaction and integration into adult society as well. I think that's a good deal healthier, and better preparation for real life.

Your objection seems to be based in the idea that homeschooling is something done by fundamentalist rustics with a questionable education. I'm a homeschooling parent myself, and that's certainly not the case in my family (or with anybody I know out here in "my crazy part of the country" which IS the setting for the thread.) I'm educated, well-read, not the slightest bit religiously motivated -actually, I think our public schools are too friendly toward religious nonsense, which is one of the many reasons my son does not attend one- and have done an excellent job of raising a child who is both delightful to be around and remarkably well educated. He has some minor issues (he can't stand large groups and loud noises) that would make him very difficult to educate in a classroom setting with other young children, which are not a factor at all at home. As his parent it's my responsibility to educate him in the most productive setting, and for him a room with thirty noisy six year olds would be about as unproductive as it gets, so knowing his personality and his potential, as his parent I'm doing what's best for him and teaching him at home.

I gotta say, the homeschool kids, on average, seem much better socialized than many of the regular school kids. The HS kids look adults in the eye when they speak, and they do better playing in mixed age groups. I think that is because they have more exposure to both groups during an average day. As you point out, being exposed only to other kids your age is a rather contrived socialization experience, not at all what kids can expect to encounter in the real world. It is also a diverse group, many different political, religious and ethnic backgrounds are represented.

Also, my aunt homeschools her kids. They are definitely not religious fanatics. All their kids are incredibly bright and seem both happy and well socialized.

Although, as I said before, I think the court ruling is not a good thing. Parents need choices for their kids if we are going to force a child to be educated.

Didn't think ya could.


And, I'm sorry to hear the public schools kids in your area have learned to be such jerks that they ridicule homeschooled kids. Bet they're real nice to gays and atheists, too, huh? Excellent socialization they get in them thar public schools.

And fer cryin' out loud, what makes you think you absolutely must go to school to be around other children? My kids spend HOURS every day with other kids! They just aren't sitting in the back row shooting spit wads while they do it.

Your assertion that teacher education "relates primarily to managing thirty kids of the same age group" just goes to show how little you know about what goes into teacher education. The vast majority of teacher education courses are methods classes, ie how to get a child, or children, to learn a particular subject. These courses include comprehension strategies, methods for teacher in an effective manner, the relevant research and studies for teaching, the nuts and bolts of imparting information to a child or group of children in an effective manner that will help children to learn. The next largest grouping of classes are the practicums, where the pre-service teacher actually gets out into the classroom to observe and teach. In addition, you have to take the relevant subject classes, gen ed classes, and finally, one, maybe two classes on classroom management.

And your claim that homeschooled children have better outcomes is specious at best. First of all, homeschooled students aren't required to take the mandatory tests like those for NCLB. Thus, you are pulling your data from a self selected group of participants. That is not a valid statistical sampling. Second, while public schools have to throw all their students into the the measuring mix, from those with special needs to those with behavioral, emotional, or home problems, home schooled children come from a pretty homogeneous group of average to high achievers. This radically skews the data. Finally, when home schooled children hit college, all the sudden they are having to scramble to learn information that was left out of their education, especially those who are Christian home schoolers(which is far and away the vast majority of home schooled students). The most serious educational deficits that they have to make up is in science, since of course these fine Christian folks don't teach evolution or any of the related fields that are vital to a well rounded scientific education. Sure, there are many students who get around this by going to conservative Christian colleges, but all that does is compound the problem once the student actually goes to work in the real world.

There are very good and valid reasons that teaching requires a college education. I would suggest that you acquaint yourself with them before trying to imply that teacher education is of little account.

I'm perfectly aware of what teacher training comprises.

Her general ed is the same as most, except that she took very easy courses whenever possible. She has some special training in teaching music and art to children (but no special facility in, or love of, either music or art I should add. She does not draw or play an instrument, nor does she know much theory behind either. Her required music course was fulfilled by a history of popular music class, her art class was women in film.) She can't write a coherent essay using even a very basic canned format such as the five paragraph essay. If she's ever brought home a book on pedagogy or child development, I haven't seen it. She definitely hasn't borrowed any of mine (I have a lot of stuff that's not homeschooling specific. Wouldn't they at least read some Holt?) She has no real intellectual curiosity or love of learning, on the rare occasion that she's reading something outside of school it's some facile bestseller, usually a romance novel.

The fall after next, she'll be a graduate of a well-regarded teacher training program and out there teaching somebody's kids, scary as that thought is. "Trained professional." Hrmph.

Note to self: When commenting on school-related threads, proofread before posting. =)

My daughter suffered for four years under a series of incompetent burnouts with teacher's licenses. After that, we started homeschooling so that she could start learning again.

Careers dating back 40 yrs in public education. They feel the system has broken down and doesn't have the 'range in curriculum' which is needed for a healthy learning evironment. In fact, they see the system being completely taken over by federal idiots. In urban areas, the kids are taught only basics, no arts, no sports, no field trips, etc. There is little pay or respect for good teachers. Most intelligent people take the hint and move on to different careers. The older teachers hold on because of their pensions...they know it's been disintegrating for the last 30 yrs.

Education is a racket, a funnel-job, a pipeline to no where for most of the inner city kids. Public schools are funded by the local real estate taxes, with only 11% coming from the Feds, yet the Feds are allowed to enforce their guidelines and testing? Yes. The inner city schools( and likely rural, as well) need every dime of help they can get, so they accept the rules.

Some even say the system is set up for failure(s). This is so obvious in working class/poor neighborhoods across the coutry. 'Failures' are more likely to get into trouble. Getting into trouble could mean ending up in the industrial prison complex.

If people want to teach their children at home, send them to appropriate 'testing' organizations for period checks/rate/compare, I think that would be very interesting to observe and positive. But I don't think the State has the right to enforce mandatory 'in-school' learning. Not if their children are doing well.

I think California has a legal residency problem and wants to scout out illegals through a program which mandates all children be in 'SCHOOL'.

Also..don't forget. The UN/CFR sets the federal program. One World Govt social programs implies 'centralizinng' education. Scary thought. Very limited thinking there....but 'limited' may be just the ticket for those who desire a one world brain.

I don't have any kids now and therefore no dog in the fight, but I feel like this is government control going too far. OTOH at some point you need to protect kids from being handicapped by parents who really don't have a clue what they are doing.

I know a few people who were home-schooled and grew up just fine. Their parents weren't accredited teachers but they were bright enough and dedicated enough to do a good job.

You either have to put your kids in a school that is run by the state government, or have them taught by a teacher who is accredited by the same state government. There is too much opportunity for political indoctrination; if you think that is OK now you may change your mind in the future when government is run by people who don't share your views.

I'd rather see a set of objective requirements for getting a high school diploma, i.e. a standard exam in which a student demonstrates a command of the basics.

"I'd rather see a set of objective requirements for getting a high school diploma, i.e. a standard exam in which a student demonstrates a command of the basics."

You make a good point; but what happens when they're unable to pass that exam?

At that point I would probably be in favor of putting them in public school for remediation.

how does junior get all those years back to get an education?

be interesting to see how this plays out in the years to come.

i recall several teachers mentioning that they were not credentialed. i had two Phd teachers, that were immensely knowledgeable and great teachers, who had not gone through the diploma mill accreditation process and had no desire to teach in the public schools.

(except possibly religious schools which fall under some federal tax exemption, which I would never count as important) that do not have credentialed teachers. And I live in California. I'm going to be enrolling my child in a private school when he begins kindergarten, and all the ones I've looked into have teachers with better credentials than the ones in public schools.

Only a college degree.

http://www.caisca.org /

that's the california Association of Independent Schools. they accredit independent schools in California under the aegis of NAIS, and they do not require certification from California for teachers as part of the credentialing process.

or you could go talk to CalWestEducators a headhunting firm in Encino and ask them about private school certification.

by 'credentials' people are talking about the state certification (which in California is simply a matter of taking the right classes in the right order at the right schools) not other credentials. i went to private schools and most of my teachers older than 30 posessed at least a Masters, most from Ivy League or just under Ivy League level, but not in education, in a subject matter. My physics teacher wasn't credentialed to teach Physics, but he had a Ph.D from MIT in, yes, physics, and had spent 15 years teaching grad students before moving to the high school level. My Sophomore year, he was the national science teacher of the year. he could not geta job in the public schools because he didn't have the right education classes and credentials. that's what people mean by credentials in this thread.

and in the 14 years she was there I believe only two teachers had State certification. Some had certification from the Association of Christian Schools but most did not. And lest you think the quality of education suffered for this supposed lack, of the 14 students in her graduating class 12 went to college, including one to Northwestern and one to Princeton. Last year, my daughter received her degree in Psychology magna cum laude.

There's a lot more to effective teaching than a piece of state issued paper.

Some may, but I know many that don't.

My dad spent 40 years teaching in two different private schools. He had to be certified to teach for both of those schools.

Many seek out high achievers in their subject areas, rather than applicants with teaching degrees, because they believe that the former have more to offer the students.

But not in mine.

If I'm reading correctly, this ruling relates to "cover schools" but not to the R-4, or to home-based charters or, home-based public options (usually called "independent study" or something like that.) A broader ruling would not only eliminate most homeschooling options, but most private options, and doing so would run counter to quite a few rulings on the national level, so I doubt that would hold up long.

that is exactly how many homeschoolers have succeeded in their court battles. they essentially are conducting their OWN private schools. that's been cited in some cases.

As noted in a thread upstream, the private school my daughter attended did not require State certification, and in the 14 years she was there I believe only two teachers had State certification. Some had certification from the Association of Christian Schools but most did not. And lest you think the quality of education suffered for this supposed lack, of the 14 students in her graduating class 12 went to college, including one to Northwestern and one to Princeton. Last year, my daughter received her degree in Psychology magna cum laude.

There's a lot more to effective teaching than a piece of state issued paper.

There should be a guarantee of that teacher's performance by being credentialed.

What was the rate from your high school, with all those State certified teachers?

Personally, I would rather trust my children with a teacher who was educated to be a teacher over some christian soccer mom who doesn't like evolution being taught at her kid's middle school. We need to get rid of homeschooling AND private schooling. Until everyone plays under the same rules, it will be impossible to implement any sort of successful nationwide educational program.

The "soccer mom" teachers at my children's private school somehow managed to attain an 80%+ success rate of their graduates going on to university. What was the success rate at your high school, with all those educated, State certified professionals? And why are you so adamant we all must strive for mediocrity and not be allowed to find our own path to enlightenment and knowledge?

and that state regulations can't be so strict and narrow that they force them to teach the same things as public schools.

The cases involved a native school in Hawaii, where public schools were being used to force assimilation on native and Japanese children and the state was attempting to end the practice of private schooling which was less assimilationist, and a Nebraska law that mandated that both public and private schools teach only in English.

did not know that. I can understand why due to language barriers but still think curicullum should be standardized and regulated.

In my area, the Catholic schools require teachers to be certified. So do the more reputable private schools. State laws don't require it but the schools themselves do.

coming soon..

better than public schools.. california has really abysmal and dangerous schools.. in 98 a survey showed only 3 in 7 were at HS level upon graduation, 2 in 7 couldn't read a newspaper, 3/nearly 4 in 7 couldn't write well enough to fill out a job application. with dropout rates 30 to 40%, i used to live there

they were still reeling from what Reagan did as Governor.. 4 months after he was elected it was said if he quit being governor, it would take 20 years to fix his damage, he nearly shut down U of Davis, the principal Agricultural research facility in the world, the heart and soul of the economy of CA. then the 8th largest economy in the world. before Reagan.. collage was free public education.. just had to pay registration and books.

sorry, but almost any adult with a high school education can teach the average elementary school student anything they really need to know (and before everyone jumps down my throat for not knowing what I am talking about, I posess both a masters in elementary education and a California elementary certification) it's not that tough to teach the average child to read, write, do fairly basic math and social studies, science and even music and art if you have some talent. On a one on one basis, or a couple to one, a parent with a rudimentary education can do just fine. After all, they already have the authority, and are invested in their child's success. The challenge and art of teaching comes from teaching other people's children en masse.

You can make all sorts of reasonable arguements about socialization and the like, but ask any parent who has taught their child to read, or used a teachable moment in life, it's not an unreasonable thing for parents to do.

Plus, the very certification arguement is absurd, many of the best schools in the country, certainly in California, do not have certified teachers, you think the teachers at the swanky prep schools in Malibu and Santa monica are certified? Or even catholic schools? I spent my entire academic career, including two and a half masters degrees, in private schools, I doubt I ever had a teacher holding a state credential. Does this ruling mean that my mom, a teacher of forty years experience, on three continents, and a winner of state teacher of the year, couldn't homeschool my children, if I had any and we so wanted, because she doesn't have a state certification? That's absurd.

good teacher. I do not remember a thing from Algebra or Geometry & understood neither.

They can hire somebody for that subject, at the high school level enrollment in a community college course is a great option (the potential downside is that too many credits can make later college admission difficult or impact scholarship eligibility,) a mentor can be found, a self-instructional text can be used, the parent can learn along with the student or take a refresher before that point...

As I stated above, homeschooled students have much better outcomes than their peers.

PS The fact that you spent a year each on Algebra and Geometry and did not understand or remember them is not a good argument in favor of subjecting more kids to the system that was supposed to teach you math.

The fact is that the many texts available make it possible for anyone who is dedicated to do this. I remember my daughter's first math book - it actually told me word-for-word what to say to her! It's not that big of a deal. My older daughter (who is 3 grades ahead, by the way), is doing about 1/3 of her school with dvd instruction, 1/3 on the internet, and the other 1/3 by me.

My husband and I both have advanced degrees, so I'm not worried about my children not being taught effectively, however, I don't think it's necessary to hold advanced degrees to do this properly. The willingness to put in the time, the dedication, money for proper materials, and the willingness to spend a lot of time with your children is all that is required, in my opinion.

I'm not even going to bother justifying to those who will flame exactly why I am doing this, except that my husband and I have very good reasons. And yes, we are liberal democrats, and no, we are not doing this for religious reasons.

but decided against it because we didn't believe we'd be able to devote enough time to them to make it worthwhile. There was never any doubt we had the education and talent to do it. Our concern, as I said, was ensuring we had the time to do it effectively. Fortunately, we were able to send them to private school, instead, an experience that worked out quite well for both girls. They both didn't stay with it throughout. The experience and education fit well for one girl, the other asked for and received transfer to a public school in the fourth grade. Both girls received very good educations.

I guess my point in this is that everyone has to make decisions most comfortable for themselves and in the best interest of their children. Good luck with your experience with your children.

It's dangerous to let a child use their mind independently and without interruption!


I just discovered that Howard Zinn has a Young People's History of the United States -- I wonder if that is being used in the schools to teach history.. No? I doubt it.

you really don't think that with a short brushup you couldn't follow along in a 3rd grade math book?

let's run through some key options:

1: can you read?
2: can you write?
3: can you add 2+2 and understand why?
4: do you have the interest to learn alongside your child the things you don't know?

if you answered yes to all of the above, you are perfectly qualified to homeschool your child.

And makes my masters degree in education worth no more than the paper it is printed on.

you're really saying that on a one on one basis, the average adult can't teach the average child? Baloney. You need a professional to handle a classroom, but one on one? Come on, people have been doing that for millenia. That's what my masters in education taught me. You really want to claim that no kids read before they go to school? That people can't teach their kids things? (which students do you want, the ones that have parents that teach them things at home, or the ones whose parents teach them nothing?)

whom don't want to be there.

Teaching one or two kids is entirely different. I know. I've taught in the classroom, and I've homeschooled. Homeschooling is INFINITELY easier, and the results are WAY better.

The hubris here is staggering.

I doubt you even know what pedagogy is.

Give me experience over credentials any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

from Brown. How many PS teachers have that? And, no, she isn't CERTIFIED. But she's AWESOME, and their are only FIVE kids in the class. My son can hates it if has to miss.

And yet their minds were better trained for rational thought, imagination and problem solving than just about any PhD today.

How many certified HS teachers are going to tell a 14 year old what the WTO is really all about?

That claim is nearly as absurd as they come.

Bill Gates dropped out of college.

The Wright Brothers never got high school diplomas.

What university did Henry Ford attend?

Edison?

His teacher thought he was addled and told his mother so. His mom knew he was brilliant, pulled him out of school and home schooled him. He probably would have been labeled ADHD today.

Name a Microsoft product that did not originate elsewhere. Gates is a ruthless and agressive businessman - not an innovator.

Edison was the Bill Gates of his day - not an inventor so much as an agressive businessman who knew how to manipulate the patent system to gain control of the work of others

Albert Einstein had a degree in physics

Chester Carlson, inventor of the Xerox machine, had a degree in physics from CalTech and worked for a research lab.

Tim Berners-Lee (inventor of HTTP and the Web) has a degree in physics

The first link of ArpaNet (proto Internet) was created by university researchers at UCLA and Stanford

The semiconductor was developed by highly educated researchers at AT&T labs

Far more innovations have been developed by folks who have the discipline and motivation to gain formal education than by backyard eccentrics who shun formal education

Wright Bros. Ford. Ben Franklin. Abe Lincoln. Backyard eccentrics, all.

As for Mr. Gates, as much as we love open source, software engineers might not be getting paid today if it weren't for Gates. A mixed blessing, really. Without the motivation of being paid, computing may not have come to the point where it is today.

Which of these quotes regarding education is not real?

1. "School produces mental perversion and absolute stupidity." --Vincent Youmans, world-famous American physician and academic (1867)
2. The creation of the compulsory public schooling system was ordered by "certain industrialists and the innovative who were altering the nature of the industrial process." --James Bryant Conant, President of Harvard University from 1933 to 1953 (1949)
3. "We shall not try to make these people or any of their children into philosophers or men of learning or men of science." --Rockefeller's General Education Board (1906)
4. Education is "the development of critical reasoning and the acquiring of basic facts relating to science, history, the arts, and similar areas." --Education Department (1968)

and indeed their contributions are significant. However, you ignore the contributions of the formally educated because it does not serve to prove your meaningless point. What of Feynman, Fermi, Watson & Crick; what of Maxwell, whose discoveries are directly responsible for the fact that you can type such things on a computer in the first place?

Just because you imagine that most "major" inventions or innovations were made by those who did not have advanced degrees in their fields does not make it so.

Is it a coincidence that of the people mentioned as rebuttal, in at least two cases, their best-known contributions were in the field of destruction (atom bomb)?

The purpose of the education industry today is to churn out people of use to a system of capitalist control. That's pretty much it.

History is full of mavericks who didn't need a GPA to accomplish anything.

That is certainly one way of looking at it. Cynical, yes, but you are entitled to your opinion.

Just understand that there are progressive individuals out there that either have, or are pursuing, degrees in scientific fields. Not everyone is a Robert Oppenheimer or a Josef Mengele.

Additionally, if producing "people of use to a system of capitalist control" was the ultimate goal of this sinister academic machine, you'd think it wouldn't be quite so cost prohibitive to get an education to begin with.

Your argument requires cognitive gymnastics that could injure the one performing it.

You pull out four or five exceptional individuals to say anyone can be taught, or perhaps an education isn't even necessary?

You are pointing to a few geniuses for whom nothing in any fashion would have made a difference. The problem isn't with these people but with the average kid who will go nowhere without an education.

Actually, I had two really good ones who did, when I was 15 and 16. The most useful one I took was a course in my last year of high school that did a fairly good job of explaining global politics, e.g. distribution of resources and resultant effects on nations, protectionism vs. globalization, major international treaties, etc. The teacher had a knack for demonstrations and activities that made things much easier to understand.

Louisa May Alcott, Alan Alda, Agatha Christie, C.S. Lewis, Margaret Mead, Ada Lovelace, Billy Joel, Frances Collins.....


All were homeschoolers or drop-outs for at least part of their K-12 education.

To believe that 1 in 10,000 parents can master later high school topics (every one of them mind you) at the needed level to enter college is ludicrous.

I don't think at third grade a student suffers from home school, but I have personally seen them coming in at a sophomore or junior level and be blown away almost instantly--we then end up putting them back. Fortunately the vast majority of students have realized, somewhere around middle school, that they were not going to be able to keep up and transferred them to a private (usually Christian) school. Those school do, in fact, tend to do very well, in large measure because of the homogeneity of the clientele.

I think one of the ironies here is that the kids who could most benefit from home schooling are those whose parents are least likely to be able to give it to them. In my city (Houston) there is a large Hispanic population, many of whom are in high risk schools. They would likely do better in a home school environment but have parents that are completely and utterly illiterate (and in any case are frequently working 3 minimum wage jobs and don't have time).

First of all, OF COURSE no homeschool parent masters every high school topic: they find someone ELSE to teach their kids those subjects, just as what happens in high school. My kids' teachers include an Ivy League math major (no teaching credential), a Stanford Ph.D (no teaching credential), a 5th degree black belt (no credential), an electrical engineer (no credential) and a couple of computer programmers (no credential). I majored in English.

Second, a lot of kids do really well with independent study situations where the teacher is online.

Third, a lot of teen homeschoolers take classes at community colleges (where most teachers don't have a credential, btw).

Finally, sure you've seen 'em all fail. And I've seen 'em all succeed. My niece transferred into a huge public high school as freshman after HSing all her life, and she's been a miserable failure: 4.0 for two years straight... elected a student council officer.... varsity athlete her freshman year... chosen by faculty as "student of the month".... what a loser.

I found this but haven't yet confirmed it by looking at the relevant Calif statute. Can anyone lllok this up

"The short version: The LA Times got it wrong in the first sentence of their article.Parents without teaching credentials can still educate their children at home under the various exemptions to mandatory public school enrollment provided in § 48220 et seq. of the Cal. Ed. Code. The parents in this case lost because they claimed that the students were enrolled in a charter school and that with minimal supervision from the school, the children were free to skip classes so the mother could teach them at home. There is no basis in law for that argument. If only the parents had attempted to homeschool their kids in one of the statutorily prescribed methods, they would have prevailed"

http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/ps/cd/psfaq.asp

Calif Dept Of Ed
Private Schools Frequently Asked Questions

#14 May a parent who is home schooling his or her own child file a Private School Affidavit?

I believe in freedom and choice.

While I was not homeschooled, and probably wont homeschool my kids, I dont like the idea of the government forcing thier will on individuals.

I home-schooled because my kids wanted to (they have a friend who is home-schooled). I did it through the Mtn. View School system (credentialed teachers overseeing).

I came across many parents who were home-schooling for religious reasons. All but 2 of these 'religious' home-schoolers had only a HS diploma. The teachers overseeing the program were VERY accommodating. If their kids were lapsing in certain areas (sometimes by 1-2 years) they would let it slide.

The non-religious home-schoolers generally had a kid w/ a behavioral or learning difficulty.

All of them - myself included would have done well w/ training.



PS - I would never do it again, but kudos to those who do it well.

There are also parents that home school for political reasons, or social reasons, or ideological reasons ("political" vs. "ideology" ... "ideology" could include "teaching philosophy").

In the mid-90s it was about 50-50, religious versus non-religious, and both halves had higher college attendance rates than the average public school student. Now, the homeschooled group wasn't a random sample, but they still did well when compared to their peers. (A friend's wife was dissertating on precisely who homeschooled, trying to piece together the demographics.)

It really depends where you live and which group sticks out more.

Home schooling worked quite well for her.

Yeah sure, you've got a PhD, and those college students you turn out seem to be okay, but you don't have the magic slip of paper!

Nobody trained you in whatever methods and theories of pedagogy were in fashion! How did you know which New New New New Math to teach, or whether phonics or whole language was currently the Educational Great Satan, or What History is Important and What We Shoehorn in to Look Fair? How could you educate one kid without at least three years of training in methods for managing thirty at once?

You've doomed your daughter to a lifetime of wearing a paper hat! At least until she gets married and has eighteen kids for Jesus, 'cause we all know those are the only people who homeschool!



Edited: Two typos. I guess I'd better turn my kid over to the authorities, clearly I'm not fit to teach a six year old.

You have the right to an attorney...

I agree.

That sounds odd, doesn't it?

The frogs have been in the hot water for so long they don't even know what's killing them.

I believe in freedom, and I don't believe in the No Child Left Behind law, nor in forced testing, labelling, classifying, and grading of kids FROM AGE 6 ONWARD as if they were meat or vegetables. Spoon-feeding from worksheets is inferior to reading "The Great Books", in my opinion. Homework spills over into MY time with MY child in the evenings, such that it turns me into a drill sergeant forcing him to finish low-level busy work, which is not challenging but is time-consuming, and which eats up the precious, limited time that we have after dinner and before bed.

His school is NOT a loving environment; it has the atmosphere of a prison, as do most, in spite of the good hearts and good intentions of the teachers who teach there. The teachers don't get to set the rules nor the curriculum. His teacher hates having to give all these tests and all these grades.

For twelve formative years, we are all forced to sit passive in classrooms under the control of an impersonal system designed by unseen bureaucrats and under the immediate surveillance of whichever state-certified individual you happen to be assigned to. It's great preparation for accepting your position as cog in a consumer society. The great teachers (and I believe there are many) who are able to inspire students are doing so in spite of the school "system" rather than because of it.

Careers dating back 40 yrs in public education. They feel the system has broken down and doesn't have the 'range in curriculum' which is needed for a healthy learning evironment. In fact, they see the system being completely taken over by federal idiots. In urban areas, the kids are taught only basics, no arts, no sports, no field trips, etc. There is little pay or respect for good teachers. Most intelligent people take the hint and move on to different careers. The older teachers hold on because of their pensions...they know it's been disintegrating for the last 30 yrs.

Education is a racket, a funnel-job, a pipeline to no where for most of the inner city kids. Public schools are funded by the local real estate taxes, with only 11% coming from the Feds, yet the Feds are allowed to enforce their guidelines and testing? Yes. The inner city schools( and likely rural, as well) need every dime of help they can get, so they accept the rules.

Some even say the system is set up for failure(s). This is so obvious in working class/poor neighborhoods across the coutry. 'Failures' are more likely to get into trouble. Getting into trouble could mean ending up in the industrial prison complex.

If people want to teach their children at home, send them to appropriate 'testing' organizations for period checks/rate/compare, I think that would be very interesting to observe and positive. But I don't think the State has the right to enforce mandatory 'in-school' learning. Not if their children are doing well.

I think California has a legal residency problem and wants to scout out illegals through a program which mandates all children be in 'SCHOOL'.

Also..don't forget. The UN/CFR sets the federal program. One World Govt social programs implies 'centralizinng' education. Scary thought. Very limited thinking there....but 'limited' may be just the ticket for those who desire a one world brain.

The government cannot enforce its monopoly on education. Parents, not bureaucrats, should decide on education.

(The majority of spelling-bee winners have been home-schooled over the past decade.)

it isn't just the awful, impersonal, and bound for failure, public ed program

to isolate and brainwash physically, sexually, psychologically abused children. The "parents" in question are unfit and need serious prison time for child abuse from what I've read (sorry, no link, read the court papers on another site).