Home School Ruling Needs To Be Fixed - Pronto
Posted by: Jubal | 03/10/2008 3:46 PM
I was stunned by the state Court of Appeals ruling that parents wishing to home-school their children must first obtain a teaching credential.
Here's the ruling itself for those who care to peruse it.
I've finished a cursory reading of the opinion, which seems to rely almost entirely on the 1953 Turner ruling by the state Court of Appeals. Legal scholar Eugene Volokh discusses the ruling at his Volokh Conspiracy blog, and the Pacific Justice Institute is planning to lead the appeal of the decision.
According to the Family Research Council Blog:
It is absurd to suggest a teaching credential is any guarantee of of quality instruction, or conversely that lack of a credential indicates pedagogical incompetence. Does anyone believe that generally speaking, children who are home schooled are less educated than their publics school counterparts?
Part of the lunacy is that according to the court ruling, it doesn't even matter if a home-schooled child is receiving an education superior to that he or she would get in a public or private school.
Even assuming the court decided correctly in a narrow sense, it serves to illuminate how the law is the court applies it is at odds with common sense policy.
Teachers Union: We're Lovin' It!
The California Teachers Association expressed it's support of the anti-home school ruling:
Other than overturning the Appellate Court ruling on appeal, the only other resort is political . The legislature could act remedy the situation, but its willingness to do so will likely depend on whether the CTA's satisfaction with the ruling is translated into active opposition to legislative remedy.
If the legislature fails to act, the only remaining option is the initiative process. Home schoolers are a very organized group whose grass-roots support would reduce the initiative qualification price tag. If Governor Schwarzenegger's outrage of the Appellate Court ruling extends beyond words and into action, a corrective initiative stands an good chance of passage -- at least in the absence of a dishonest CTA negative campaign of distortion.
Stay tuned.
Here's the ruling itself for those who care to peruse it.
I've finished a cursory reading of the opinion, which seems to rely almost entirely on the 1953 Turner ruling by the state Court of Appeals. Legal scholar Eugene Volokh discusses the ruling at his Volokh Conspiracy blog, and the Pacific Justice Institute is planning to lead the appeal of the decision.
According to the Family Research Council Blog:
The Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) has taken a step to nullify the decision. While the Rachel L. family and its California counsel plan to appeal the decision to the California Supreme Court, HSLDA has also posted a petition online collecting the signatures of those who would like the Court to "depublish" the opinion. HSLDA plans to formally ask the Court to depublish the Rachel L. opinion which would render it unusable "by other California courts" and eliminate the decision as a threat to other homeschoolers.On policy level, the consequences of this ruling is something parents of all ideological inclination should oppose. Keep in mind the Turner decision was written in 1953, when California public schools provided a better education, and their curriculum content was not offensive to so many parents.
It is absurd to suggest a teaching credential is any guarantee of of quality instruction, or conversely that lack of a credential indicates pedagogical incompetence. Does anyone believe that generally speaking, children who are home schooled are less educated than their publics school counterparts?
Part of the lunacy is that according to the court ruling, it doesn't even matter if a home-schooled child is receiving an education superior to that he or she would get in a public or private school.
Nor was the Turner court persuaded by the parents' contention that the education being provided to their children in their home was as good or better than the children would have obtained in a public or private school or through a credentialed tutor, and therefore the purpose of the statutes was satisfied. The court stated California's legislative scheme makes no such exemption to attendance in a public school. (Turner, supra, 121 Cal.App.2d Supp. at p. 868-869; accord Shinn, supra, 195 Cal.App.2d, at p. 694, where the court stated that "[h]ome education, regardless of its worth, is not the legal equivalent of attendance in school in the absence of instruction by qualified private tutors.")There's nothing wrong with home schooling in California. Home schoolers score as well or better on standardized tests as their public school counterparts. It dates back to colonial times. Home schooling poses no threat to the the public welfare, and pound for pound, does more to "protect the public welfare" than the public education system whose "primary purpose" that is supposed to be.
Even assuming the court decided correctly in a narrow sense, it serves to illuminate how the law is the court applies it is at odds with common sense policy.
Teachers Union: We're Lovin' It!
The California Teachers Association expressed it's support of the anti-home school ruling:
The ruling was applauded by a director for the state's largest teachers union.Of course the CTA thinks that. It's a guild, and it will applaud any governmental action -- legislative, executive or judicial -- that hinders competition to the public school monopoly. The burgeoning home school movement is an embarrassing reminder of the failure of the public education system -- a failure to which the teachers unions are accessories. If this cripples the home school movement in California, the CTA is naturally pleased.
"We're happy," said Lloyd Porter, who is on the California Teachers Association board of directors. "We always think students should be taught by credentialed teachers, no matter what the setting."
Other than overturning the Appellate Court ruling on appeal, the only other resort is political . The legislature could act remedy the situation, but its willingness to do so will likely depend on whether the CTA's satisfaction with the ruling is translated into active opposition to legislative remedy.
If the legislature fails to act, the only remaining option is the initiative process. Home schoolers are a very organized group whose grass-roots support would reduce the initiative qualification price tag. If Governor Schwarzenegger's outrage of the Appellate Court ruling extends beyond words and into action, a corrective initiative stands an good chance of passage -- at least in the absence of a dishonest CTA negative campaign of distortion.
Stay tuned.
CATEGORY:
California Stuff, Liberty
Do you need some more apples to compare to the oranges we're talking about, Mr. Whipple? I'll take...
I am a home school parent. My wife and I educate our two sons through our own private home school. Our oldest is 17 and our youngest is 11. This ruling only serves to confirm that the law and common sense have NOTHING to do with each other.
Our oldest child has applied to 4 very prestigious private institutions around the country. He has been admitted to 3 and will hear back from the 4th school in April. He's received academic scholarships from two schools totally $56,000. He was awarded these scholarships based on purely his academic record at application to the schools. We anticipate he will be receiving scholarships from the other schools as well.
While we are very proud of our son and certainly believe he is a smart and motivated kid. He would certainly be considered in the middle of his group of home school friends and fellow students. The average performance of a home school student has caused most universities to not just allow their admission, but in many instances to pursue these students due to their high-level of success in college.
The nation's military academies and every top school now seeks out these students. It's not much of a surprise to see that a teacher's union would like to take credit for their success.
No matter what the outcome of the events in California, we will continue to home school our youngest child. We believe that a child can achieve in any academic setting, but for our family, home schooling has worked incredibly well. Let us hope that the law will take a step toward common sense.
Justice H. Walter Croskey,
"In obedience to the constitutional mandate to bring about a general diffusion of knowledge and intelligence, the Legislature, over the years, enacted a series of laws. A primary purpose of the educational system is to train school children in good citizenship, patriotism and loyalty to the state and the nation as the means of protecting the public welfare."
No matter what side of the homeschooling debate you might be on, that statement should send chills up the spine of every freedom living American. This hits home for me as well, we have sent our children to private school, then homeschooled. As the kids got older we sent them to an Independent Study Program where they have thrived with teachers who are passionate about teaching, without a credential. Those girls are very successful college students, and our oldest son is about to graduate the program with honors, while attending culinary school. Nobody can say my children are not a benefit to the state.In fact, every one of them also volunteers, and the older three work the polls for every election. They have become patriots without the benefit of public instruction. In the meantime, our youngest seemed to need more structure, so we sent him to military school with credentialled teachers, and he is now in a public high school. Hands down the public high school is the worst setting we have experienced. His math teacher shows episodes of Lost during class, nobody gives homework because "the kids won't do it anyway", and my pleas for information fall on deaf ears. If that is the environment the CTA believes is more beneficial to my kids than the education my older chidren received without the benefit of teaching degrees, they are smoking the contraband they have confiscated from their students. I have not been a member of HSLDA in years, but they are getting my check now!
When my girls were in public school, I was shocked to see them bring home schoolwork which the teacher would correct with wrong answers. I would see the teacher write words on the board, spelling them incorrectly. I would read letters and instructions sent home from the teacher, grammatically incorrect and poorly written. That's when I knew I could do a better job than the teachers.
Sad to say, a teaching credential is no more guarantee that someone is a good teacher, than a driver's license is a guarantee that someone is a good driver. Thankfully today's paper reports Jack O Connell has recognized that, and states that he sees no reason to change current policy. But that still leaves me fearful that this nut job of an Appelate Court judge is still on the bench, and just because the State is not going to enforce the public school policy does not mean it is not on the books. This needs to be changed!
Horrifying!
California Courts are out of control! This a blatant example of the courts profaning basic constitutional rights. Someone correct me if I'm wrong in essence they are saying "Unless the state approves of your teacher you can't be taught".
Follow this line of reasoning and it leads to the worst kind of government control.
Sounds like something Nazi Germany would implement.